
GeForce RTX 4070
Popular choices:

Quadro M5500
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce RTX 4070
2023Why buy it
- ✅128.3% more average FPS across 12 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $201 less on MSRP ($599 MSRP vs $800 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 354.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 44.9 vs 9.9 G3D/$ ($599 MSRP vs $800 MSRP).
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (12 GB vs 8 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌33.3% higher power demand at 200W vs 150W.
Quadro M5500
2016Why buy it
- ✅Draws 150W instead of 200W, a 50W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 4070 across 12 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 8 GB vs 12 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌33.6% HIGHER MSRP$800 MSRPvs$599 MSRP
GeForce RTX 4070
2023Quadro M5500
2016Why buy it
- ✅128.3% more average FPS across 12 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $201 less on MSRP ($599 MSRP vs $800 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 354.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 44.9 vs 9.9 G3D/$ ($599 MSRP vs $800 MSRP).
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (12 GB vs 8 GB).
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 150W instead of 200W, a 50W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌33.3% higher power demand at 200W vs 150W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 4070 across 12 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 8 GB vs 12 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌33.6% HIGHER MSRP$800 MSRPvs$599 MSRP
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce RTX 4070 better than Quadro M5500?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Quadro M5500 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro M5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 183 FPS | 108 FPS |
| medium | 167 FPS | 91 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 78 FPS |
| ultra | 131 FPS | 52 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 150 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 124 FPS | 77 FPS |
| high | 110 FPS | 59 FPS |
| ultra | 101 FPS | 38 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 36 FPS |
| medium | 78 FPS | 33 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 21 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 18 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro M5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 544 FPS | 229 FPS |
| medium | 454 FPS | 198 FPS |
| high | 353 FPS | 151 FPS |
| ultra | 299 FPS | 120 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 351 FPS | 170 FPS |
| medium | 288 FPS | 144 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 116 FPS |
| ultra | 197 FPS | 91 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 172 FPS | 98 FPS |
| medium | 144 FPS | 82 FPS |
| high | 125 FPS | 69 FPS |
| ultra | 101 FPS | 52 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro M5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 884 FPS | 356 FPS |
| medium | 713 FPS | 285 FPS |
| high | 643 FPS | 237 FPS |
| ultra | 569 FPS | 178 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 684 FPS | 267 FPS |
| medium | 549 FPS | 214 FPS |
| high | 483 FPS | 178 FPS |
| ultra | 424 FPS | 134 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 467 FPS | 178 FPS |
| medium | 373 FPS | 142 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 119 FPS |
| ultra | 277 FPS | 89 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro M5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 751 FPS | 234 FPS |
| medium | 612 FPS | 202 FPS |
| high | 536 FPS | 164 FPS |
| ultra | 497 FPS | 140 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 615 FPS | 183 FPS |
| medium | 500 FPS | 159 FPS |
| high | 433 FPS | 125 FPS |
| ultra | 395 FPS | 104 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 384 FPS | 100 FPS |
| medium | 324 FPS | 80 FPS |
| high | 301 FPS | 63 FPS |
| ultra | 272 FPS | 50 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce RTX 4070 and Quadro M5500

GeForce RTX 4070
GeForce RTX 4070
The GeForce RTX 4070 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 12 2023. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 1920 MHz to 2475 MHz. It has 5888 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 26,919 points. Launch price was $599.

Quadro M5500
Quadro M5500
The Quadro M5500 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 8 2016. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1140 MHz to 1165 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,915 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce RTX 4070 scores 26,919 versus the Quadro M5500's 7,915 — the GeForce RTX 4070 leads by 240.1%. The GeForce RTX 4070 is built on Ada Lovelace while the Quadro M5500 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 5 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 5,888 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 2,048 (Quadro M5500). Raw compute: 29.15 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 4.772 TFLOPS (Quadro M5500). Boost clocks: 2475 MHz vs 1165 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro M5500 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 26,919+240% | 7,915 |
| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 5 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 5888+188% | 2048 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 29.15 TFLOPS+511% | 4.772 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2475 MHz+112% | 1165 MHz |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 184+44% | 128 |
| L1 Cache | 5.8 MB+673% | 0.75 MB |
| L2 Cache | 36 MB+1700% | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the GeForce RTX 4070 is support for DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The Quadro M5500 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.The GeForce RTX 4070 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Quadro M5500 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro M5500 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | Yes (DLSS 3.5) | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce RTX 4070 comes with 12 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M5500 has 8 GB. The GeForce RTX 4070 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 36 MB (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 2 MB (Quadro M5500) — the GeForce RTX 4070 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro M5500 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 12 GB+50% | 8 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6X | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 192-bit | 256-bit+33% |
| L2 Cache | 36 MB+1700% | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 12 (12_1) (Quadro M5500). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro M5500 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2+2% | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.3+8% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 8th Gen NVENC (2x) (GeForce RTX 4070) vs NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M5500). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs NVDEC (Maxwell). Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro M5500).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro M5500 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 8th Gen NVENC (2x) | NVENC (Maxwell) |
| Decoder | 5th Gen NVDEC | NVDEC (Maxwell) |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 | H.264,H.265,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 4070 draws 200W versus the Quadro M5500's 150W — a 28.6% difference. The Quadro M5500 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 650W (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 350W (Quadro M5500). Power connectors: 8-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 304mm vs 0mm, occupying 3 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 85.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro M5500 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 200W | 150W-25% |
| Recommended PSU | 650W | 350W-46% |
| Power Connector | 8-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 304mm | 0mm |
| Height | 137mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 3 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C-6% | 85 |
| Perf/Watt | 134.6+155% | 52.8 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 4070 launched at $599 MSRP, while the Quadro M5500 launched at $800. The GeForce RTX 4070 costs 25.1% less ($201 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 44.9 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 9.9 (Quadro M5500) — the GeForce RTX 4070 offers 353.5% better value. The GeForce RTX 4070 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2016).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro M5500 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $599-25% | $800 |
| Performance per Dollar | 44.9+354% | 9.9 |
| Codename | AD104 | GM204 |
| Release | April 12 2023 | April 8 2016 |
| Ranking | #32 | #321 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












