NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 GDDR5X

Launched in late 2018 as a quiet revision of the original Pascal-based GTX 1070, this GDDR5X variant swaps the older memory type for a faster one while keeping the same GP104 chip and core configuration. The result is a card that sits in a curious middle ground: it is neither a new architecture nor a simple rebadge, but a memory-tuned refresh that alters the performance profile in specific scenarios. This analysis examines what the benchmark data implies for gaming at various resolutions, how it stacks against its immediate peers, and what its feature set, power demands, and memory subsystem mean for a modern system.

Benchmark Performance

The benchmark data for this card is unusual: the average benchmark score is recorded as zero, and the percentile ranking against all GPUs is exactly 50. This suggests that the card sits precisely at the median of the entire GPU landscape in the database, meaning half of all tracked graphics cards perform better and half perform worse. In practical terms, this places it as a solid mid-range performer, not a flagship and not a budget part.

The absence of specific rival scores in the nearestRivals field means direct percentage comparisons are unavailable from the data. However, the FP32 compute throughput of 6.463 TFLOPS provides a useful anchor. This figure is derived from the 1920 shading units operating at the boost clock of 1683 MHz. For context, this is significantly lower than the compute figures of higher-tier cards from the same generation, but it is well above the output of older mid-range cards. The texture rate of 202.0 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 107.7 GPixel/s further reinforce this positioning: the card can fill a 1080p or 1440p frame quickly, but it is not designed to push extreme resolutions or high refresh rates at maximum settings.

The effective memory clock of 8 Gbps, combined with a 256-bit bus, yields a bandwidth of 256.3 GB/s. This is the key differentiator from the standard GTX 1070, which used GDDR5 at a lower effective speed. The increase in memory bandwidth does not change the raw shader throughput, but it does improve the card's ability to feed those shaders in memory-bound scenarios, such as high-resolution texture loading or anti-aliasing. Benchmark results would likely show a modest uplift in 1440p and 4K performance compared to the original GDDR5 version, though the core compute ceiling remains unchanged.

Who Should Consider It

Given the 50th percentile ranking, this card is best suited for gamers targeting 1080p with high to ultra settings and 1440p with medium to high settings. The 6.463 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is sufficient for modern titles at these resolutions, provided the user accepts that some demanding games will require tweaking to maintain smooth frame rates. The 256.3 GB/s memory bandwidth is ample for 1080p and adequate for 1440p, where texture streaming and large assets can strain narrower buses.

For 4K gaming, the data suggests this card is not the ideal choice. The pixel rate of 107.7 GPixel/s and the compute throughput are limiting factors; while the 8 GB VRAM is enough for many 4K textures, the card would struggle to maintain 60 frames per second in graphically intensive titles without significant settings reductions. Users who prioritize resolution over detail level might still consider it for older or less demanding games, but the benchmark percentile indicates that better options exist for that use case.

The card is also a reasonable candidate for users on older systems upgrading from the GeForce 900 series, as it offers a substantial generational leap in efficiency and raw performance. However, it is not a future-proofing purchase; with a successor already released and this card marked as end-of-life, its relevance will diminish as newer games demand more compute and memory bandwidth.

How It Compares

Since the nearestRivals field is empty, direct comparisons to specific competing models cannot be made from the provided data. The percentile ranking of 50 places it exactly at the median of all GPUs in the database, which implies it is a balanced performer relative to the entire field. In the absence of rival scores, the most meaningful comparison is against its own predecessor, the GeForce 900 series. The Pascal architecture in this card delivers a significant improvement in performance-per-watt compared to that older generation, allowing higher clock speeds and more efficient compute within the same 150 W TDP envelope.

Looking at its successor, the GeForce 20 series, this GTX 1070 variant lacks the dedicated RT and tensor cores that define that generation. This means it cannot accelerate ray tracing or deep-learning-based features like DLSS, which are absent from its feature set. In raw rasterization performance, the gap between this card and a mid-tier GeForce 20-series card is not enormous, but the feature divergence is stark. For users who do not care about ray tracing, this card remains a competent performer; for those who want those features, it is a dead end.

FAQ

Q: What is the effective memory speed of this card?

A: The memory runs at 1001 MHz, which translates to 8 Gbps effective due to the GDDR5X architecture.

Q: Does this card support Vulkan?

A: Yes, it supports Vulkan 1.4, along with DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6.

Q: How much VRAM does it have and what is the bus width?

A: It has 8 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 256.3 GB/s.

Q: What is the required power supply wattage?

A: The suggested PSU is 450 W, and the card itself has a TDP of 150 W.

Q: Is this card still in production?

A: No, it is marked as end-of-life, with a release date of December 2018.

Q: How many display outputs does it have?

A: It features 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a connectors.

Ray Tracing and Feature Set

This card has no RT cores and no tensor cores, meaning it offers no hardware-accelerated ray tracing and no tensor-based AI features such as DLSS. Its feature set is purely rasterization-focused, relying on the Pascal architecture's strengths in traditional rendering. The API support is solid for its era: DirectX 12 (12_1) ensures compatibility with modern titles that use DX12's low-level features, while Vulkan 1.4 support is particularly relevant for cross-platform titles and emulators that leverage Vulkan for performance. OpenGL 4.6 is also present, covering older applications and professional workloads that still rely on that API.

The pixel rate of 107.7 GPixel/s and texture rate of 202.0 GTexel/s indicate that the card can handle high fill-rate demands, such as heavy post-processing effects or high-resolution shadows. However, the absence of tensor cores means that any AI-enhanced features found in newer games will not be available. This is a significant limitation for users who want to play recent titles with ray tracing enabled, as software-based ray tracing would be prohibitively slow on this hardware. The display outputs include three DisplayPort 1.4a connections, which support high refresh rates at 1440p and are capable of driving 4K displays at 60 Hz, though the card's compute limits might prevent it from delivering those frame rates in demanding games.

Power and Cooling

The card has a TDP of 150 W, which is modest for its performance class and reflects the efficiency of the 16 nm Pascal architecture. The suggested PSU is 450 W, leaving ample headroom for a typical system with a mid-range CPU. It requires a single 8-pin power connector, which is standard for cards in this tier and compatible with most modern power supplies.

Cooling is handled by a dual-slot design, which is a conventional form factor that fits most cases. The card's dimensions are 267 mm in length, 112 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, making it a compact dual-slot card that should fit in most mid-tower cases. The 150 W TDP means that even a capable air cooler can manage temperatures effectively, and the card is unlikely to produce excessive noise under load. For users with smaller cases, the 267 mm length is shorter than many high-end cards, which is an advantage for compatibility. The lack of a launch MSRP in the data prevents any cost analysis, but the power and cooling requirements are straightforward and should not pose a challenge for most builds.

Memory Subsystem

The memory subsystem is the defining feature of this card. It uses 8 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, which is the same capacity and bus width as the standard GTX 1070, but with a higher effective speed of 8 Gbps. This results in a bandwidth of 256.3 GB/s, a substantial increase over the GDDR5 version's bandwidth. The impact of this change is most visible at higher resolutions, where the additional bandwidth helps maintain texture throughput and reduces stuttering in memory-intensive scenes.

At 1080p, the 256.3 GB/s bandwidth is more than sufficient, and the card's compute limits are likely to be the bottleneck in most games. At 1440p, the bandwidth is still adequate, but the card will start to show its limits in titles with large, highly detailed textures. At 4K, the 8 GB VRAM capacity is a concern, as some modern games can exceed this with ultra texture packs, leading to potential performance drops or texture pop-in. The 256-bit bus width is a balanced choice, offering more bandwidth than narrower buses without the cost and complexity of a 384-bit interface. Overall, the memory subsystem is well-suited for the card's intended performance tier, providing a meaningful uplift over the original GTX 1070 without changing the core compute characteristics.