Here's the 4070 Super vs the 7800 XT in this same set of tests: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-x6EfOf0ZoAM.html And here's the 7800 XT vs the 4070 (not super) in this same set of tests: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ry8OJTnMhKs.html There will definitely be more to come when I have time to finish the editing. I've tested a bunch of other GPUs in this same set of tests including some interesting ones to compare to the 4070 Super like the 3070 Ti, 3080, 3090, and 4070 Ti.
I love how Daniel has no excuses for not doing upscaling tests unlike most other channels which pretty much everyone uses at this stage. It’s much more of a real world scenario than the 20FPS running native 4K tests of other channels.
When comparing purely Nvidia GPUs, the numbers are very useful. But if you want to compare to AMD or Intel cards, you are comparing apples to oranges if you add upscaling. So I prefer native performance to find out which cards are better overall at a given price.
I try to show realistic use cases, which I think for many people include upscaling. In a 2 GPU comparison like I do, you can show the image quality differences (albeit imperfectly due to YT compression), whereas in a bar graph that gets a bit trickier to navigate. I try to produce content that complements the big "bar graph" style reviews that have a lot more GPUs in one video, but usually fewer settings tested. Both are very useful in my opinion.
@@danielowentech Thank you Daniel, definitely much appreciated. I have a 4K monitor so as far as I’m concerned native benchmarks are as useful as 3DMark to me. I’ll utilize some kind of upscaling and I’ll turn up the settings till I reach a comfortable FPS and I believe most people are like that. If people decide based on the feature set as a purchase reason, calling it unfair and not showing that is uniformative. When you show upscaling and framegen, I can find out if those games will run on that card at an acceptable performance. Place in the pecking order by itself isn’t enough. Ok it beats this and that but can it play what I want? The channels who went full academic stopped showing that.
The super sips more power but other than that it looks like a nice refresh if you want that level of performance. On the other hand I still believe the most appealing "super" card is the 4070 Ti Super. Don't waste your money if you're on a 3080 or newer since RTX 5000 series are just a year (maybe earlier) away.
And if there is no crypto rising in near future, we might finally be gotten "normally" price GPU in those year. I have hope for Battlemage since it will fight this year.
Bro i thought that about the 40 series last gen and it turned out to be a line of crap gpu’s I don’t really have much confidence anything next gen will be worth it unless you’re willing to spend the 3000$ or whatever they’re gonna charge for their 90’series card
It's great to see the 4070 SUPER is performing very well as a middle ground GPU in between the 4070/7800XT and the 4070 Ti/7900XT. Excited to check out the 4070 Ti SUPER and 4080 SUPER benchmarks, since they're the ones supposedly dethroning the 7900XT and XTX respectively.
They will for now. After like 3 years those cards will already struggle i theorize. Meanwhile the 7900XT Will have plenty of longevity cause of its vram and bus width. Same goes for XTX.
looks like that 18% performance difference on average from VideoCardz is pretty spot on the RTX4070 is now finally at the price it should have launched at and the Super version has a decent enough difference for that additional 50$.
Almost 20% performance for basically the same power consumption? Definitely worth 50 Bucks. In fact i got my Super for only 30 Euro more than a standard 4070, that decision was even more of a no brainer.
600$ for last gen 80 series performance is a joke. We used to get that for 300$, and last gen we got it for 400$, this gen 600$. Bullshit. On a positive note, Daniel is providing the best comparison data out there ATM. Good job man!
I’ve watched a few videos of yours now, why is the footage always jittery when you do these tests? Is it because of the uncapped frame rate? Do you turn vsync/freesync off? I’m only asking because I’m assuming these games don’t look like this in practice and if they did I would turn down the settings immediately
I have a footnote about this at the beginning of the video. Yes, external capture without vsync looks like this. It would not look this way on a VRR display. Capturing use the GPU encoder would help the smoothness of the footage, but it can have a minor performance penalty, so I choose the method of external capture for most accurate performance results.
Biggest issue I see is the 4070 super was often 4-10c hotter. How cool the 4070 runs is the entire reason I picked one up. 4070 Super is more hungry for more performance and you can see it in the temps.
Same, picked up a 4070 open box for 440$ and im very impressed with 56- 60 degree C on most things its 15 degrees cooler than my old 1070 and way quieter. Thanks for ur comment it made me feel better about my purchase haha
Same here, had a 7900 XT originally and my NR200P case was like a hot box! Returned it, went to Best Buy last year got my 4070 FE model with Best Buy credit card for $499. Paid it off right away in full as I have the cash and got more points on the Best Buy rewards.
@@eplugplay8409 Got mine for $544. Wish I had a Best Buy if you picked it up for $499. Mine though is the MSI Ventus 2x White Edition, weighs almost nonthing. I don't see GPU sag being an issue for it. I read how hot AMD GPUs are and it's scary. Nvidia's 3000 series was very hot as well which is why the 3070 never got a single fan XTI version unlike the 970, 1070 and 2070. The 4080 and 4090 are as well, so much so like some AMD GPUs they can melt their connectors. Meanwhile the 4060 and 4070 would be the best GPUs on the market in my opinion if they had more VRAM.
@@eplugplay8409 shame they got rid of the credit card code, cause it came in handy. I used it for my 4070 FE as well, and was gonna use it for a 50 Series card!
Suggested future head to head video: 4070 Super vs 4070 Ti Super vs 3090 - Many people want the 24GB of VRAM for AI and productivity. But does it even make sense for gamers even considering future proofing? Nvidia themselves compared the 4070 Super to the 3090 so I find it a bit odd that only TechPowerUp seemed to have put it in their GPU lineup.
Why game at 1440p? Just buy a controller , and game at 4k. The 4070 can handle it well. I've never gone below 1920p with that card in single player titles, and mostly go for 2160p(4k) , and heck even 2880p(5k).
I still cannot imagine paying $600 for 12GB of VRAM. That said, I cannot wait to see what the 4070 TI and 4080 Super do. With 16GB, either may be a really good deal.
I think we all fall victim to Stockholm syndrome. $600 is not a mid-tier GPU and 12gb vram is just upsetting. Considering AIBs will charge $50+ more and we will be looking at $700+ after tax. At least we know the future 5070 should perform faster than this 4070 super possibly around 4070 super ti territory.
All GPUs I bought were NVDIA; GTX970, GTX1080ti and RTX3090. I undervolted my 3090 to 1830mhz 800mV average power 240-270w so I just say the facts. NVIDIA could extend the 3000 series cards by giving us software level Frame Generation like AMD did. I am sure NVIDIA will make something excursively only for the future 5000 series like FG2 or path tracing to force us to upgrade again. Just like Jensen says - Buy more to save more.
Please mention at least at the start what cpu and ram freq/latency are you using for the tests. I know you focus on scaling but we don't know what to compare to when we do some aproximate maths for our builds to get an idea about expected performance. I know the differences aren't huge but it helps.
My thinking on frame generation is this: Frame generation trades latency for smoothness. Smoothness tops out at a relatively low framerate. So it's likely that FG really only makes sense at *low* framerates in games that aren't very latency sensitive (e.g., flight simulators like MSFS and DCS World). At high framerates in an FPS or something like that, you're getting worse latency and no noticeable improvement in smoothness unless the framerate is so low as to make a competitive FPS really unpleasant no matter what.
Bought the RTX4070 for 570€ (Asus proart). Incredible GPU, good brand, great design, low temps, the best GPU I've ever owned. To get a similar model in super version, I would have to pay at least 700€ (730€ Asus Tuf). So I guess I bought the right one after all when it was cheap. (Deal was in Germany ebay by an official electronic store: 690-50€(ebay code)-60€(asus cashback)-10€(cashback like shoop))
it's rediculous that 4k TV's and monitors have been easily affordable now for 6 years , yet these hardware companies expect us to pay 800+ for a video card to run 4k at 60+ fps native.
@@berkertaskiran i've had a samsung 4k 60hz TV since 2018. also on a 3070 so i know the boat youa re in currently saving for a new PC . still not sure what video card i'll go with .. torn between 7900xtx , 4080 super or the 4070ti-super. i wont ahve the money till around august or sept... so will give time for every one maybe even intel too , to get new products all out.
@@DenverStarkey I think 4070Ti Super is a pretty good deal right now because it's the cheapest Nvidia 16GB card that is fast enough for an upgrade from 3070. Though if you don't need the tech you could also go with AMD. 4080 and 4080 Super may also be a good idea but paying that much for 16GB doesn't feel right. Honestly if I had the chance I would just go with the 4090 since I have a 144Hz screen and do productivity work as well. I think by the time you have the money 5000 series will also be close to release so you might also consider waiting for that which hopefully will be a big upgrade.
@@berkertaskiran well a 5000 series card i can afford is not that close .. even if nvidia drops the 5090 in january of 25 , it;'ll stil be 2-3 months before they release a 5080 and about 6 months before they release a 5070. so not looking to wait much longer than early Sept. if AMD launches new ryzen chips in Q3 (july-sept) i'll likely get one of them so when the 5000's do come along upgrading might be viable depending on where my RTX4000/RX7000 gpu is sitting on terms of capability versus what games are out. but since i'm on a 4k 60hz tv i think a 4080/7900xtx will hold up well on it for atleast 5 years and by then i'll be looking to just build a whole new PC again. 90 series is too rich for my blood now. If you asked me 6-7 months ago when you could get them for as low as $1500-$1700 i was actually considering them and just pushing my budget up to $3,500 to accomadate one. but then the shit with china happened and 4090's started rising in price , now i see them between $2000-2500 bucks and that is definitely too much. i only got about $200 bucks a pay check i can put back for saving. that's $400 per month. if i was aiming for a 4090 the time before i got the money together would push me in to 25. and that's starting from where i'm at now (got 1000 saved curently). as it is now it'll be about august -sept when i got the money i'm aiming for (about $3000-3200)
hi daniel, 20% more cores but only 10% power limit added which makes me think it may be the bottleneck for 4070super on heavy load, could you please raise the power limit to 240w and compare the results? thank u very much.🤝
I would love to hear your summary price to performance sweet spot once you have digested all the different super cards. I know for me I tend to spend way less than most, I like to shop at the $300 price point, I might be persuaded to $500. More than that I just cannot make myself drop that much on a video card.
I've just done these benchmarks in Cyberpunk on pretty much the same exact system specs (7800x3d, 32gb 6000mhz CL30) but with a 2080 super, and without raytracing I sit pretty much in between the 4070 and 4070 super (both at 1920x1080 and 2560x1440p), is this supposed to happen? It falls hard on it's ass though when I enable any amount of RT. If that's true, is my only upgrade path a 4080+, 7900xtx or 4090? (especially considering I'm on a 32:9 5120x1440 which is closer in system demand to 4k than it is to 1440p) I double checked that any upscaling was disabled...
You have to test with the same exact settings and exact location when comparing to someone elses benchmarks. Especially if its not a built in game benchmark, your results will be severely off as location / time of day in games can be the difference of fps being off Plus or minus 50% depending on the game and your hardware and if the game is demanding. So many factors. That being said the regular 4070 is ~45-50% faster than a 2080 super. The 2080 ti is about 20% faster than a 2080 super. Even a 7800xt would be a huge upgrade or a regular 4070, but I would highly recommend the 4070 ti super if you want to stay nvidia for more future proof if you want to keep a gpu for awhile.
I'm planning to get this card for 1080p 144hz gaming paired with my ryzen 5 5600 would this be a good idea or should i just buy the 4060Ti 16 gb version? I'm still planning to upgrade my monitor soon
Manage to grab one of these for £480 from amazon...so excited! Only had AMD graphics cards - the last one being 1660 so im so excited to use some ray tracing / path tracing at 1440p
Thanks for the review. I will still continue to use my 6750 xt. Don't forget to take care of yourself. You have been open with that you have family and day time job as a teacher. Don't overwork yourself.
@@christophermullins7163 I was thinking the same, I would like to build a pc soon and my budget si fairly tight, between the 7800 xt and 4070 Super theres a 70 euro difference and Im not sure I can justify it
@@4doorsmorewhors I think thats the wrong way to put it, its likes saying why get the 4070S when the 4080S is better.. By PTP metrics the 7800 xt/6800 xt is better if you dont care about ray tracing (which I personally dont in the slightest)
Any thoughts on using this over 4080 super on a samsung 49" G9 32:9 240Hz 5120x1440? it's a 90% 4K screen, but I am having doubts on the 40-series and waiting on the 50-generation. Add to that i only sport a 1050 Ti - which have held up suprisingly well so far. But it's hitting the bottom now with minimum specs on AAA-titles. What I am asking is if any have thoughts on what GPU to choose from the current offerings for my monitor, or if I should just take a much cheaper 4060 and save some money for a better 50-series.
I always find it crazy how demanding Alan Wake 2 is in these benchmarks. Path tracing is so good looking but also the fact that native 1080p 30fps is the experience you get on a 4070 Super is crazy to me.
I bought the RTX 4070 Super couple of weeks ago and really happy I wated so long to upgrade from my gtx 1070 which worked very well for all this years. Nvidia is expensive but I think with the 4070Super launch you get a lot for your money, finally....it´s still not cheap but I think it´s worth it.
Great analysis Daniel! The 4070 Super would be the minimum I buy for 1080p or 1440p. Did the Memory bus width or capacity ever felt limited? Thanks for video!
Really like ur benchmarking , alltho i think most ppl playing competitive' games, not professionaly , usually go for their monitors maximoum refresh rate and not for the absolute fps number. So maybe just think about showin benchmarks that go for a specific fps number ,for example 2k 165 hz , 1080 240 etc. good job though .
Yes, don't do graph please, tiny Daniel pointer + video scrolling is more than enough + entertaining. Would be interesting to see how 4070 ti super runs.
well nvida target these gpu's to use with rt dlss & frame gen so am happy with regular 4070 , gonna be upgrading in the next 4 years rtx 5070 if theres one
The margin between the different model is absurd... it's so small that some brand like ROG might have better 4070 than the founder 4070 Super, etc... imagine the confusion for the average consumer...
Because the AD104 die can't do that and they underspecced it and are now stuck lmao. Something with the 4060ti. Nvidia knows they should've made ad 106 192bit bus with 12gb of vram and ad104 256bit bus with 16gb if vram now but what's done is done and somethings gotta use the die besides the base 4070 which is like 30% cut down.
I just bought recently 4070 now it sucks little bit as I’m thinking that I should pick 4070 super. Yet I’m not planing on paying 4K, 1440p at most, so for few fps it’s too late. And 4070 it’s still much superior that 4060
You still have a powerful GPU that draws less power and doesn't have that awful 12vhrpwr pin. I also bought 4070 recently while 4070 Super were already on the market but I found out about it too late as I didn't follow recent news about GPUs. Normal 4070 still isn't that much worse than Super, it's only about 10-15 FPS less on average. 4070 Super will die at the same time as 4070 as both cards have the same Vram. If 4070 Super had 16 GB Vram, then the situation would be pretty bad for 4070. Also it matters what GPU you had earlier. I had GTX 1060 6GB so with that increase in FPS, a couple additional FPS on Super don't make any significant difference to me 😅
Yeah thats why I said if you can still find them theres lots left now but those will drop so im saying stay well away from £800 4070ti was this exists depsite it being more powerful. @@laszlozsurka8991
In my country rtx 4070 is $663 and cheapest rtx 4070 super (zotac 2 fan version) costs $733........ should i go with 4070 or the rtx 4070 super one .......any suggestion.......also here rx 7800 xt costs same as rtx 4070.....but i don't want yi buy rx.
One of three things will happen, prices will stay static and that will kill the 4070, the price of the 4070 will decrease or the 4070 Super will increase in price. Be interesting to see what happens. Hopefully the 2nd but have a feeling it'll be the 3rd.
If you use a 1440p monitor, wouldn't it make it look better to use performance mode as that is rendering the game at 720p which is exactly half the resolution of 1440p? It should make it look clearer than other modes other than native.
This just seems like a classic "3 steps forward, 1 step back" move from Nvidia. They are still selling what's basically a 60 Ti at a 50% price hike compared to previous gen -- and that's assuming the MSRP of 600 stays true. I'm not impressed, but maybe I'm just too jaded at this point.
you know... the thing is that (today and in my country) I can buy 4070 for in $123 less (tax included; this makes the 4070 cost $501 pre-tax)... for that I believe it is certainly a great pick (especially since next gen is still atleast a year away and frankly it still sounds safer choice than waiting for battlemage since - we don't know exact price, performence or release date)
$599 is a fair price. It's around 720€ where I live, and you can't find them for less than 680€. That's a huge price gap from the 550-600€ it should be at! Buying from import would probably cost more than 700€ as well, because customs + delivery doesn't come cheap... Welcome to Europe, I guess!
My buddy just saved up to buy a 4070 and uses it to play F1 24. He cranks the graphics as high as he can in 4k. Thing is, the fastest way to play is 1080p 60fps. The game doesn't render a bunch of bumps and curbs in 1080p 60fps so you don't run into as many issues in corners. I told him, and he got sad. Now, he runs in 1080p and wishes he would have spent the money on a new CPU instead of replacing his 3060ti lol.
16gb no but more than 12gb? For sure specially if you play in UWQHD or 4k, 12g is outdated ,would never buy a card for 500€+ with 12gb of VRAM, its a joke. @@stirfrysensei
@@siema14123I don't think so. I can run RT in Hogwarts at 60 fps at 4k with fsr on 6950 XT and it uses over 13gb. Other games use more. Hogwarts had a huge legacy behind it so they put additional work into optimizing while other studies release shit games that use over 16gb. The 4070 super is most certainly fast enough to run out of VRAM.. right now!
31:47 Is IMHO the wrong approach. The 1% lows is what matters. I do not care if they Game runs at 100 FPS or 120 FPS but i do care if it runs at 40 FPS or 50 FPS. The 4070 Super is way to expensive for what it is. and 9% more performance for 9% more money is also the wrong approach. RU-vidrs nowdays seem to make wrong calculation...sometimes it feeles like they try to justify the price politics from big companies. If you keep calculating like that, Nvidia and AMD are supposed to take 5000 Dollar per GPU´s within the next 10 years. You as a teacher should know this grows exponential...the consumers will not be able to purchase a GPU`s in the future, also GPU´s will become more or less a luxory product.
Its funny how the GTX 1080 Ti is still the best card for 1080p specifically in terms of value. The newer cards are better for anything above that resolution.
Even though I already own a 4070, I can't help but watch these videos just to be annoyed that I didn't wait for the super (even though I had no idea they were coming back in September when I bought my 4070). I think there are probably a few of us out here who are annoyed (esp the 4070ti owners)
@@fetzultrahd It’s still a good card though, and I stand by saying that it’s better than the 7800xt if you care at all about RT and DLSS. Not to mention all the professional things you can do with it like AI, encoding, live-streaming, CAD and anything else that uses CUDA.
@@denismolander I was just saying this earlier. The 4060 and 4060ti are the ones that needed a perf boost the most. No reason you shouldn’t be able to get 12GB of VRAM and decent performance for $300-$350. Honestly I would recommend a PS5 over a build using a 4060, or a 6700xt if they are open to AMD.
6700xt owner. I want this super as I have £400 saved on amazon and can sell the 6700xt for £250 ish so it's essentially a free upgrade. Just the 12gb is like.... how long till I can't even max textures...... might just save for 5000's or a 16+gb card. Thoughts? (I play 1440p)
thats like throwin away money; 6700 xt is good for another year or two... U have 2 squezze every bit of performance left on that card b4 upgrading 2 a nwer gen... U shudnt upgrade atleast till Q1 2025... U dont need to play on Xtreme graphics every game...
@rohanstormbanks7601 85% chance I'll wait as I do think I want my next card to be strong in RT and Nvidias 4th gen RT I think will be a step up. Plus, sqeek in some path tracing
Seems decent. I’m just gonna say this now but these prices aren’t going anywhere. 50 series will be the same, and by then you’ll be so accustomed to it.
So I was in the market for a 4070 or 4070 Super. Instead I got an ASUS TUF 3080 12 GB in pristine condition off ebay for $450. I've been benchmarking it and I'm really confused with my results. It seems like my card is punching way above its weight. For example, I ran the 1440p ultra benchmark pass against Daniel's numbers and my 3080 averaged 92 FPS. No upscaling. How is my 3080 faster than a 4070 Super?? To add to this surprising result I'm using an 8700k and 32 GB of 3600. It's delidded and overclocked to 5GHz 47x cache ratio. Not sure what the hell is going on. I thought I would be bottlenecking this card by about 10% not actually scoring better than what im seeing online. 🥴
I looked at why I bought the 4070 over the Super and the AMD cards, price. With AMD i couldve easily found a card to rival or stomp on Nvidias best, but I do grow tired of the mandatory undervolting altho the performance is worth it. So why not the super bc I got the 4070 for around $145 less. And before some kid chimes in, money IS very relative when you are an adult and this is a hobby and NOT a paying business venture. If that gap wasnt as wide Id probaly chugged down a super, but no regrets for what I paid and the performance is still better then most at its normal price range.
