
GeForce RTX 4070
Popular choices:

Quadro RTX 8000
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
- ✅+35.1% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $9,400 less on MSRP ($599 MSRP vs $9,999 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 2155% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 44.9 vs 2.0 G3D/$ ($599 MSRP vs $9,999 MSRP).
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ✅More future proof: Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Quadro RTX 8000 across 13 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 12 GB vs 48 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Fewer Tensor Cores for AI-powered features like DLSS and frame generation (184 vs 576), which can reduce FPS gains in supported games.
- ❌13.9% longer card at 304mm vs 267mm.
Quadro RTX 8000
2018Why buy it
- ✅3.1% more average FPS across 13 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅213% more Tensor Cores for AI-powered features like DLSS and frame generation, which can increase overall FPS in supported games (576 vs 184).
- ✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (48 GB vs 12 GB).
- ✅Measures 267mm instead of 304mm, a 37mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (19,927 vs 26,919).
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 48 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌1569.3% HIGHER MSRP$9,999 MSRPvs$599 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 2.0 vs 44.9 G3D/$ ($9,999 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
GeForce RTX 4070
2023Quadro RTX 8000
2018Why buy it
- ✅+35.1% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $9,400 less on MSRP ($599 MSRP vs $9,999 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 2155% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 44.9 vs 2.0 G3D/$ ($599 MSRP vs $9,999 MSRP).
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ✅More future proof: Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Why buy it
- ✅3.1% more average FPS across 13 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅213% more Tensor Cores for AI-powered features like DLSS and frame generation, which can increase overall FPS in supported games (576 vs 184).
- ✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (48 GB vs 12 GB).
- ✅Measures 267mm instead of 304mm, a 37mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Quadro RTX 8000 across 13 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 12 GB vs 48 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Fewer Tensor Cores for AI-powered features like DLSS and frame generation (184 vs 576), which can reduce FPS gains in supported games.
- ❌13.9% longer card at 304mm vs 267mm.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (19,927 vs 26,919).
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 48 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌1569.3% HIGHER MSRP$9,999 MSRPvs$599 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 2.0 vs 44.9 G3D/$ ($9,999 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce RTX 4070 better than Quadro RTX 8000?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Quadro RTX 8000 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 RTX 8000 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 183 FPS | 205 FPS |
| medium | 167 FPS | 190 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 166 FPS |
| ultra | 131 FPS | 151 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 150 FPS | 187 FPS |
| medium | 124 FPS | 158 FPS |
| high | 110 FPS | 130 FPS |
| ultra | 101 FPS | 121 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 119 FPS |
| medium | 78 FPS | 100 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 77 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 70 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro RTX 8000 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 544 FPS | 499 FPS |
| medium | 454 FPS | 442 FPS |
| high | 353 FPS | 343 FPS |
| ultra | 299 FPS | 289 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 351 FPS | 325 FPS |
| medium | 288 FPS | 274 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 223 FPS |
| ultra | 197 FPS | 183 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 172 FPS | 153 FPS |
| medium | 144 FPS | 135 FPS |
| high | 125 FPS | 113 FPS |
| ultra | 101 FPS | 90 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro RTX 8000 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 884 FPS | 897 FPS |
| medium | 713 FPS | 717 FPS |
| high | 643 FPS | 598 FPS |
| ultra | 569 FPS | 448 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 684 FPS | 673 FPS |
| medium | 549 FPS | 538 FPS |
| high | 483 FPS | 448 FPS |
| ultra | 424 FPS | 336 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 467 FPS | 448 FPS |
| medium | 373 FPS | 359 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 299 FPS |
| ultra | 277 FPS | 224 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro RTX 8000 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 751 FPS | 673 FPS |
| medium | 612 FPS | 605 FPS |
| high | 536 FPS | 515 FPS |
| ultra | 497 FPS | 448 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 615 FPS | 544 FPS |
| medium | 500 FPS | 487 FPS |
| high | 433 FPS | 418 FPS |
| ultra | 395 FPS | 336 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 384 FPS | 355 FPS |
| medium | 324 FPS | 323 FPS |
| high | 301 FPS | 297 FPS |
| ultra | 272 FPS | 224 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce RTX 4070 and Quadro RTX 8000

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 RTX 8000
Quadro RTX 8000
The Quadro RTX 8000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 13 2018. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1395 MHz to 1770 MHz. It has 4608 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 260W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 72 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 19,927 points. Launch price was $9,999.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce RTX 4070 scores 26,919 versus the Quadro RTX 8000's 19,927 — the GeForce RTX 4070 leads by 35.1%. The GeForce RTX 4070 is built on Ada Lovelace while the Quadro RTX 8000 uses Turing, both on 5 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 5,888 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 4,608 (Quadro RTX 8000). Raw compute: 29.15 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 16.31 TFLOPS (Quadro RTX 8000). Boost clocks: 2475 MHz vs 1770 MHz. Ray tracing: 46 RT cores (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 72 (Quadro RTX 8000) with 184 Tensor cores vs 576.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro RTX 8000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 26,919+35% | 19,927 |
| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Turing |
| Process Node | 5 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 5888+28% | 4608 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 29.15 TFLOPS+79% | 16.31 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2475 MHz+40% | 1770 MHz |
| ROPs | 64 | 96+50% |
| TMUs | 184 | 288+57% |
| L1 Cache | 5.8 MB+29% | 4.5 MB |
| L2 Cache | 36 MB+500% | 6 MB |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 46 | 72+57% |
| Tensor Cores | 184 | 576+213% |
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 RTX 8000 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.The Quadro RTX 8000 supports the newer Upscaling support, whereas the GeForce RTX 4070 is capped at DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro RTX 8000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce RTX 4070 comes with 12 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro RTX 8000 has 48 GB. The Quadro RTX 8000 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 504 GB/s (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 768 GB/s (Quadro RTX 8000) — a 52.4% advantage for the Quadro RTX 8000. Bus width: 192-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 36 MB (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 6 MB (Quadro RTX 8000) — the GeForce RTX 4070 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro RTX 8000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 12 GB | 48 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6X | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 504 GB/s | 768 GB/s+52% |
| Bus Width | 192-bit | 384-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 36 MB+500% | 6 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 12.2 (Quadro RTX 8000). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro RTX 8000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12.2 |
| 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 7.0 (Quadro RTX 8000). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs PureVideo HD VP10. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro RTX 8000).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro RTX 8000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 8th Gen NVENC (2x) | NVENC 7.0 |
| Decoder | 5th Gen NVDEC | PureVideo HD VP10 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 4070 draws 200W versus the Quadro RTX 8000's 260W — a 26.1% difference. The GeForce RTX 4070 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 650W (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 650W (Quadro RTX 8000). Power connectors: 8-pin vs 1x 8-pin + 1x 6-pin. Card length: 304mm vs 267mm, occupying 3 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro RTX 8000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 200W-23% | 260W |
| Recommended PSU | 650W | 650W |
| Power Connector | 8-pin | 1x 8-pin + 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 304mm | 267mm |
| Height | 137mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 3 | 2-33% |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 134.6+76% | 76.6 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 4070 launched at $599 MSRP, while the Quadro RTX 8000 launched at $9999. The GeForce RTX 4070 costs 94% less ($9400 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 44.9 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 2.0 (Quadro RTX 8000) — the GeForce RTX 4070 offers 2145% better value. The GeForce RTX 4070 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2018).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro RTX 8000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $599-94% | $9999 |
| Performance per Dollar | 44.9+2145% | 2.0 |
| Codename | AD104 | TU102 |
| Release | April 12 2023 | August 13 2018 |
| Ranking | #32 | #78 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












