NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains only one shared benchmark result between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. In this test, the RTX 4070 scores 3854 points, while the RTX 5080 SUPER scores 3075 points. The delta is 25.3% in favor of the RTX 4070. This is a decisive win for the older, smaller card.

The RTX 4070 also appears across nine other benchmark entries, including Geekbench OpenCL (154858), Geekbench Vulkan (174152), Passmark G3D (26927), and Passmark GPU Compute (14720). The RTX 5080 SUPER has no additional entries; its only recorded benchmark is that single 3DMark run. Consequently, the head-to-head record stands at one win for the RTX 4070 and zero for the RTX 5080 SUPER.

What makes this result striking is the context of the rest of the measured data. The RTX 4070’s average benchmark score across all its recorded tests is 37648, placing it in the 81st percentile of all GPUs in the database. The RTX 5080 SUPER’s average score is 3075, which puts it in the 19th percentile. That percentile gap is enormous, and it suggests the 3DMark result is not an outlier but rather a reflection of the RTX 5080 SUPER’s limited measured performance in this database.

Look at the nearest rivals for each card. The RTX 4070 sits between the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (avg score 37628, delta 0.1%) and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (avg score 37507, delta 0.4%). It also edges out the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 (37157, delta 1.3%) and trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (38135, delta -1.3%). These are tight margins, indicating the RTX 4070 is clustered with mid-range and older workstation parts in aggregate performance.

The RTX 5080 SUPER’s nearest rivals tell a different story. Its closest neighbor is the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 (avg score 3163, delta -2.8%), followed by the Intel Arc Pro B60 (3182, delta -3.4%), the NVIDIA GeForce 820A (2983, delta 3.1%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M (2967, delta 3.6%). These are low-end and legacy parts. The data shows the RTX 5080 SUPER, despite its name and specifications, lands alongside GPUs that are several generations old and far below its intended tier.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is substantial. The RTX 4070 uses the AD104 chip on the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The RTX 5080 SUPER uses the GB203 chip on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, also TSMC 5 nm. Both are 5 nm parts, but the transistor counts differ significantly: the RTX 4070 packs 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the RTX 5080 SUPER carries 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die. The transistor density is nearly identical, 121.8M per mm² versus 120.6M per mm², which makes sense given the same foundry and node.

Compute resources scale up on the RTX 5080 SUPER. It has 10752 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 112 raster operation units. The RTX 4070 has 5888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. That is roughly 82% more shading units, 83% more TMUs, and 75% more ROPs for the newer card. Ray tracing cores jump from 46 to 84, and tensor cores from 184 to 336. The FP32 throughput doubles from 29.15 TFLOPS to 56.28 TFLOPS, and FP16 is identical at a 1:1 ratio for both.

Memory is another major divider. The RTX 4070 uses 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus, delivering 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 5080 SUPER uses 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 1.02 TB/s. That is double the capacity and double the bandwidth. Clock speeds also favor the newer card: base clock is 1920 MHz versus 2295 MHz, boost clock is 2475 MHz versus 2617 MHz. The memory clock is 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) for the RTX 4070 and 2000 MHz (32 Gbps effective) for the RTX 5080 SUPER.

The bus interface differs as well, PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RTX 4070 and PCIe 5.0 x16 for the RTX 5080 SUPER. Display outputs are updated on the newer card, with HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1b outputs, versus HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a on the older card. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Physical dimensions grow. The RTX 4070 is 240 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 40 mm wide. The RTX 5080 SUPER is 304 mm long, 137 mm tall, and 40 mm wide. Both are dual-slot cards and use a single 16-pin power connector. The RTX 4070 has a TDP of 200 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W, while the RTX 5080 SUPER has a TDP of 415 W and no suggested PSU listed.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4070 wins in the only direct comparison available, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, by 25.3%. It also has a much higher average benchmark score across its full test suite, 37648 versus 3075, and a far better percentile ranking, 81st versus 19th. For any workload represented by the database’s aggregate metrics, the RTX 4070 is the clear performer.

The RTX 5080 SUPER wins on paper in nearly every architectural specification. It has more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, more ray tracing cores, more tensor cores, higher clocks, more memory, wider bus, and higher bandwidth. Its FP32 throughput is nearly double. Those raw numbers suggest it should dominate in compute-heavy tasks, ray tracing, and high-resolution rendering. The recorded data does not support that expectation, however, because the only benchmark result for the RTX 5080 SUPER is far below the RTX 4070’s result.

Consider the pixel rate and texture rate. The RTX 5080 SUPER delivers 293.1 GPixel/s and 879.3 GTexel/s, compared to 158.4 GPixel/s and 455.4 GTexel/s for the RTX 4070. In fill-rate-limited scenarios, the newer card should win decisively. But the database lacks any fill-rate-specific test to confirm this. The 3DMark Steel Nomad result, which is a DX12 workload, contradicts the specification advantage. This creates a puzzle: either the RTX 5080 SUPER sample in the database is underperforming, or the benchmark suite does not capture its strengths.

For memory-heavy workloads, the RTX 5080 SUPER’s 24 GB and 1.02 TB/s bandwidth are major assets. The RTX 4070’s 12 GB and 504.2 GB/s are half those values. The RTX 5080 SUPER also supports PCIe 5.0, which can matter for data transfer in certain professional or AI workloads. The RTX 4070 is limited to PCIe 4.0. These are real advantages, but again, the benchmark data does not include a test that isolates them.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 has an average benchmark score of 37648, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 3075.

Q: What is the only direct benchmark comparison between the two cards?

A: The sole head-to-head test is 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where the RTX 4070 scores 3854 and the RTX 5080 SUPER scores 3075, a 25.3% difference in favor of the RTX 4070.

Q: How do the two cards compare in memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The RTX 4070 has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5080 SUPER has 24 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus with 1.02 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the transistor counts and die sizes for each GPU?

A: The RTX 4070 uses 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The RTX 5080 SUPER uses 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RTX 5080 SUPER has a boost clock of 2617 MHz, compared to the RTX 4070’s boost clock of 2475 MHz.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each card among all GPUs in the database?

A: The RTX 4070 ranks in the 81st percentile, while the RTX 5080 SUPER ranks in the 19th percentile.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear and unusual picture. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 outperforms the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER in the only recorded head-to-head benchmark, and its aggregate score is more than ten times higher. The RTX 4070 is also in the 81st percentile of all GPUs, whereas the RTX 5080 SUPER sits in the 19th percentile. For anyone choosing between these two cards based on the database results, the RTX 4070 is the obvious pick.

The RTX 5080 SUPER’s specifications are far superior on paper, but the measurements do not reflect that. Its nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA Quadro P1000, the Intel Arc Pro B60, the NVIDIA GeForce 820A, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M, all of which are low-end or older parts. The RTX 4070’s nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Tesla P4, AMD Radeon RX Vega 56, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile, and AMD Radeon PRO W6400, which are mid-range or professional parts. The performance tier implied by the names is reversed in the data.

The RTX 5080 SUPER does have advantages in memory capacity, bandwidth, clock speeds, and compute units. It also has a higher TDP of 415 W versus 200 W, which may indicate higher sustained performance potential if properly cooled and powered. But the database records no test where those advantages translate into a win. The RTX 4070 is end-of-life, released in April 2023, while the RTX 5080 SUPER is active, with a release date at the end of 2025. The production status does not change the measured results.

A buyer looking at the RTX 4070 should expect solid mid-range performance, as evidenced by its 81st percentile rank and close competition with the RTX 4080 Mobile. A buyer looking at the RTX 5080 SUPER should be cautious, because the recorded data shows it performing at the level of a legacy entry-level card. The specifications suggest it should be much faster, but the measurements say otherwise. Based strictly on the database, the RTX 4070 is the better-performing GPU.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER |

|---------------|-------------------------|-------------------------------|

| Chip | AD104 | GB203 |

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Generation | GeForce 40 | GeForce 50 |

| Transistors | 35,800 million | 45,600 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 378 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 121.8M / mm² | 120.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1920 MHz | 2295 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2475 MHz | 2617 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1313 MHz, 21 Gbps effective | 2000 MHz, 32 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6X | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 504.2 GB/s | 1.02 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 5888 | 10752 |

| TMUs | 184 | 336 |

| ROPs | 64 | 112 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 46 | 84 |

| Tensor Cores | 184 | 336 |

| Pixel Rate | 158.4 GPixel/s | 293.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 455.4 GTexel/s | 879.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 29.15 TFLOPS | 56.28 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 29.15 TFLOPS (1:1) | 56.28 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 200 W | 415 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |

| Length | 240 mm (9.4 inches) | 304 mm (12 inches) |

| Height | 110 mm (4.3 inches) | 137 mm (5.4 inches) |

| Width | 40 mm (1.6 inches) | 40 mm (1.6 inches) |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2023-04-11 | 2025-12-31 |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | 999 USD |

| Average Benchmark Score | 37648 | 3075 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 81 | 19 |