ASUS GeForce RTX 4070 Dual

[W1zzard]

The ASUS RTX 4070 Dual comes at NVIDIA's MSRP of $600, yet offers an improved cooler over the Founders Edition. ASUS even managed to include a dual BIOS feature on their card. With the "quiet" BIOS active, the card is whisper quiet, quieter than any other RTX 4070 tested today.

Show full review

 

[Timbaloo]

Impressive "noise" results with the quiet Bios

 

[trisstann]

so AMD 6800XT card has more VRAM, cost 100$ less and offer same performance, what a deal nvida really

 

[Calle2003]

so AMD 6800XT card has more VRAM, cost 100$ less and offer same performance, what a deal nvida really

Similar performance until you enable RT then Nvidia performs better.

 

[W1zzard]

Similar performance until you enable RT then Nvidia performs better.

Or DLSS 3

 

[THU31]

so AMD 6800XT card has more VRAM, cost 100$ less and offer same performance, what a deal nvida really

Power consumption, though. That is the main thing I look at right now. Summer is coming, and I can't say I enjoyed my 3080 during the last two summers.

That was my first 300+ W card and I'm never doing that again. Only the undervolt saved it for me.

I regret not going with the 3070 back then. The 4070 would make a better upgrade now, but I'll probably still sidegrade my 3080. With an undervolt, it'll do 100-150 W with Vsync.

I think I like the ASUS card the most in this line-up. The MSI Ventus is quieter, but it's very long. I like the quiet BIOS too, so I don't have mess with the fan profile.

 

[Chaitanya]

Or DLSS 3

Fake frame generator for "moar" fps. thanks but no thanks.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Or DLSS 3

As much as I like DLSS3 it really shouldn't be why anyone buy's these cards..... At a min it isn't good enough to be a selling point.

Similar performance until you enable RT then Nvidia performs better.

A card that is over two years newer that is only really better at RT fanboys should be jumping for joy. I think this card is too slow for RT but I guess if you want that conslow like experience with RT turned on in RT demanding games good for you.

 

[Timbaloo]

For me, efficiency (and as a result noise), DLSS (not even DLSS3), NVENC and to a lesser degree RT are the selling points over a 6800XT. Wether that's "good enough" for a card that is significantly newer and has a higher price tag is up to the individual to decide.

 

[HairyLobsters]

Reminds me of when EVGA had clear video card shrouds. I like this aesthetic better than the aggressive gamer branding.

 

[Calle2003]

As much as I like DLSS3 it really shouldn't be why anyone buy's these cards..... At a min it isn't good enough to be a selling point.



A card that is over two years newer that is only really better at RT fanboys should be jumping for joy. I think this card is too slow for RT but I guess if you want that conslow like experience with RT turned on in RT demanding games good for you.

If you combine DLSS 3 with RT performance will be OK.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

If you combine DLSS 3 with RT performance will be OK.

You've obviously never used DLSS3 unless you're already running 70-90fps the latency hit is too bad for it to be useful.

Also a product that requires frame generation to not be meh isn't a good product to begin with.

 

[Zaqq]

X070 cards used to be king of performance per price, now they're not even the average, how much Nvidia have fallen...

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

X070 cards used to be king of performance per price, now they're not even the average, how much Nvidia have fallen...

$600 is the new $300. It isnt 2018 anymore.

 

[THU31]

$600 is the new $300. It isnt 2018 anymore.

The math checks out, though. 3070 had a 392 mm2 die, 4070 has a 294 mm2. TSMC's 5 nm is 60% more expensive than 7 nm.
That means $500 x 0.75 x 1.6 = $600 exactly.

And the thing is, NVIDIA had a much better deal with Samsung than they would have had with TSMC for Ampere. They even got many dies for free in the beginning when yields were bad.

And a graphics card is not just the GPU, but many other components. "Inflation" is a thing unfortunately (as artificial as it may be). And this generation is just the beginning. 3 nm is supposed to add another 25% to the cost.

 

[JimmyDoogs]

I love DLSS 3. If AMD adds it to the PS5 Pro then we're in for a 4k only world coming up pretty soon.

 

[izy]

It seems that the ASUS card has dual bios + 8 phase design compared to others that only have 6 phase and single bios but i dont think it has any impact on the performance anyway still dual bios is nice to have.

 

[Selaya]

The math checks out, though. 3070 had a 392 mm2 die, 4070 has a 294 mm2. TSMC's 5 nm is 60% more expensive than 7 nm.
That means $500 x 0.75 x 1.6 = $600 exactly.

[ ... ]

yeah, the die's $600 while everything else (memory, vrms, pcbs, capacitors) is free.
good maths.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

yeah, the die's $600 while everything else (memory, vrms, pcbs, capacitors) is free.
good maths.

I usually ignore naming and just ask myself would I feel good spending 600 USD on this gpu in 2023 and for me at least that answer is no. Is it a bad product no, does it offer 1070-1080 and 2070-2080 owners a decent upgrade sure.

I would like it a lot better at $499 as to me that would place it as a direct alternative to the PS5/XSX and this is obviously better than those assuming you already have a semi modern platform to slot it into.

I think a lot of people will buy and enjoy this card for the next couple years the ball is in AMD court hopefully they can offer a 7800XT that is clearly better but given how they wanted to charge 900 usd for the actual 7800XT they chose to call the 7900XT I'm not holding my breath either.

 

[Selaya]

oh, dont get me wrong, this should've been like $400 at most.
at $600 this is basically an insult. you're far better off buying something else, like a 6950xt or used 3080-12gb

 

[THU31]

yeah, the die's $600 while everything else (memory, vrms, pcbs, capacitors) is free.
good maths.

Why did you quote only half of my post? You literally missed my point, which was that the 4070 should be more expensive just from the die cost increase, ignoring all the other components of a graphics card.

The PCB is basically identical to the 3070's. The main difference is two fewer memory chips, albeit faster. But the "inflation" affects all these components too, so it's literally unreasonable to call the 4070 overpriced, unless you consider the 3070 overpriced. And it may have been more so, considering how good a deal NVIDIA got from Samsung.

The math definitely didn't check out with the 4080 compared to the 3080. Considering just the die size difference, you get $700 x 0.6 x 1.6 = $672. But somehow they priced that card at $1200, even though the PCB is simpler and the TDP is the same. This is the definition of overpriced.

4070 is 20% more expensive and 30% faster than the 3070.
4080 is 71% more expensive and 50% faster than the 3080.

I think these numbers speak for themselves.

Also, the 4080 is 50% faster than the 4070 at double the price.

 

[Cheeseball]

Why did you quote only half of my post? You literally missed my point, which was that the 4070 should be more expensive just from the die cost increase, ignoring all the other components of a graphics card.

The PCB is basically identical to the 3070's. The main difference is two fewer memory chips, albeit faster. But the "inflation" affects all these components too, so it's literally unreasonable to call the 4070 overpriced, unless you consider the 3070 overpriced. And it may have been more so, considering how good a deal NVIDIA got from Samsung.

The math definitely didn't check out with the 4080 compared to the 3080. Considering just the die size difference, you get $700 x 0.6 x 1.6 = $672. But somehow they priced that card at $1200, even though the PCB is simpler and the TDP is the same. This is the definition of overpriced.

4070 is 20% more expensive and 30% faster than the 3070.
4080 is 71% more expensive and 50% faster than the 3080.

I think these numbers speak for themselves.

Also, the 4080 is 50% faster than the 4070 at double the price.

Yeah this sounds correct. The RTX 4090 is not really considered "overpriced" (although it is still quite expensive), especially compared with its older brother the RTX 3090 which came out at just $100 cheaper.

The RTX 4080 is just not worth it at $1200. If they had sold it at most $800 ($100 more than the RTX 3080) or even $900, then it would've been more palpable.

RTX 4070 Ti is.... just not it at $799.

RTX 4070 is KINDA okay, but it really should be priced the same as the RTX 3070 launch price ($499) since the RTX 4070 Ti exists. I just don't like the fact that it only has 64 ROPs and a 192-bit memory bus, even though it is still significantly faster than the RTX 3070.

 

[THU31]

I just don't like the fact that it only has 64 ROPs and a 192-bit memory bus, even though it is still significantly faster than the RTX 3070.

The entire memory situation is the worst thing about the lower tier 40-series cards. Way worse than pricing.

The 4070s should have 16 GB with a 256-bit bus. The 4060s should have 12 GB with a 192-bit bus. All at the same prices. In my view nobody would have a right to complain then.

The 4050 should be the only 8 GB card, strictly for 1080p.

They definitely compensated for the lower bandwidth with more cache, but VRAM capacity is way more important than bandwidth, and that's where they screwed up.

 

[Sethiol]

How does the 4070 get Editor Choice award when it is not really faster than a 2 year old AMD GPU and $100 more? Sure, with DLSS it is faster, just not sure it's worth the $100 increase, especially when you factor in AMD is already releasing their 7series cards.

 

[unwind-protect]

How many PCIe slots does this one take?