GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile vs FX 5950 Ultra

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce FX 5950 Ultra with GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 5950 Ultra
2003, $499
256 MB DDR, 74 Watt
0.14
RTX 4070 Mobile
2023
8 GB GDDR6, 115 Watt
46.74
+33286%

RTX 4070 Mobile outperforms 5950 Ultra by a whopping 33286% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking150683
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.1531.46
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameNV38AD106
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date23 October 2003 (22 years ago)3 January 2023 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA coresno data4608
Core clock speed475 MHz1395 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1695 MHz
Number of transistors135 million22,900 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)74 Watt115 Watt
Texture fill rate3.800244.1
Floating-point processing powerno data15.62 TFLOPS
ROPs448
TMUs8144
Tensor Coresno data144
Ray Tracing Coresno data36
L1 Cacheno data4.5 MB
L2 Cacheno data32 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 4.0 x8
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x Molexno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed475 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth30.4 GB/s256.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX9.0a12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.9
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

FX 5950 Ultra 0.14
RTX 4070 Mobile 46.74
+33286%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

FX 5950 Ultra 59
Samples: 3
RTX 4070 Mobile 19474
+32907%
Samples: 13498

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD-0−1124
1440p-0−170
4K-0−143

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 188
+0%
188
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 135
+0%
135
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 140
+0%
140
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 172
+0%
172
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 115
+0%
115
+0%
Far Cry 5 139
+0%
139
+0%
Fortnite 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 216
+0%
216
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 95
+0%
95
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 146
+0%
146
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 97
+0%
97
+0%
Dota 2 178
+0%
178
+0%
Far Cry 5 133
+0%
133
+0%
Fortnite 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 195
+0%
195
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 144
+0%
144
+0%
Metro Exodus 111
+0%
111
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 229
+0%
229
+0%
Valorant 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 87
+0%
87
+0%
Dota 2 167
+0%
167
+0%
Far Cry 5 123
+0%
123
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 116
+0%
116
+0%
Valorant 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 94
+0%
94
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 90
+0%
90
+0%
Metro Exodus 69
+0%
69
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 54
+0%
54
+0%
Far Cry 5 112
+0%
112
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 89
+0%
89
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 43
+0%
43
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 90
+0%
90
+0%
Metro Exodus 44
+0%
44
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 71
+0%
71
+0%
Valorant 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24
+0%
Dota 2 146
+0%
146
+0%
Far Cry 5 61
+0%
61
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.14 46.74
Recency 23 October 2003 3 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 74 Watt 115 Watt

FX 5950 Ultra has 55% lower power consumption.

RTX 4070 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 33286% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 19 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 2500% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5950 Ultra in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce FX 5950 Ultra is a desktop graphics card while GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 81 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5950 Ultra on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 2707 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce FX 5950 Ultra or GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.