GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER vs GTS 160M

Place in the ranking	926	9
Place by popularity	not in top-100	14
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	72.36
Power efficiency	2.15	26.11
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code name	G94	AD104
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	3 March 2009 (15 years ago)	8 January 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores	64	7168
CUDA cores	64	no data
Core clock speed	600 MHz	1980 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2475 MHz
Number of transistors	505 million	35,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	220 Watt
Texture fill rate	19.20	554.4
Floating-point processing power	0.192 TFLOPS	35.48 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	288	no data
ROPs	16	80
TMUs	32	224
Tensor Cores	no data	224
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	56

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 size	large	no data
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 16-pin
SLI options	2-way	-
MXM Type	MXM 3.0 Type-B	no 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 type	GDDR3	GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	12 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 800 MHz	1313 MHz
Memory bandwidth	51 GB/s	504.2 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	VGADisplayPortDual Link DVIHDMILVDSSingle Link DVI	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management

8.0

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.0	6.7
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	+	8.9

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTS 160M 1.76

RTX 4070 SUPER 78.26
+4347%

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.

GTS 160M 678

RTX 4070 SUPER 30182
+4352%

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	4−5 −5275%	215 +5275%
1440p	3−4 −4400%	135 +4400%
4K	1−2 −8600%	87 +8600%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5
−4150%

170−180

+4150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −2171%	150−160 +2171%
Battlefield 5	0−1	240−250
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −2300%	120−130 +2300%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −4150%	170−180 +4150%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −3833%	110−120 +3833%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −4750%	190−200 +4750%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −4033%	240−250 +4033%
Hitman 3	6−7 −2050%	120−130 +2050%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −1638%	270−280 +1638%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −4033%	120−130 +4033%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −3644%	300−350 +3644%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −353%	150−160 +353%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −2171%	150−160 +2171%
Battlefield 5	0−1	240−250
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −2300%	120−130 +2300%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −4150%	170−180 +4150%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −3833%	110−120 +3833%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −4750%	190−200 +4750%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −4033%	240−250 +4033%
Hitman 3	6−7 −2050%	120−130 +2050%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −1638%	270−280 +1638%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −4033%	120−130 +4033%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −4656%	428 +4656%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −1325%	170−180 +1325%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −353%	150−160 +353%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −2171%	150−160 +2171%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −2300%	120−130 +2300%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −4150%	170−180 +4150%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −3833%	110−120 +3833%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −4033%	240−250 +4033%
Hitman 3	6−7 −2050%	120−130 +2050%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −1638%	270−280 +1638%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −4133%	381 +4133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −1575%	201 +1575%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −309%	139 +309%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−4033%

120−130
+4033%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −8200%	160−170 +8200%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −3633%	110−120 +3633%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −9200%	90−95 +9200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −8100%	80−85 +8100%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −3900%	40−45 +3900%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −4100%	80−85 +4100%
Hitman 3	7−8 −1529%	110−120 +1529%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −4020%	200−210 +4020%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −15300%	154 +15300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 −2567%	240−250 +2567%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

−2360%

120−130
+2360%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−6800%

65−70
+6800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −3250%	65−70 +3250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −6300%	60−65 +6300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	50−55
Far Cry 5	1−2 −4900%	50−55 +4900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	62

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−2900%

90−95
+2900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Metro Exodus	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Metro Exodus	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

140−150

+0%

140−150

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Metro Exodus	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	265 +0%	265 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Hitman 3	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	133 +0%	133 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	132 +0%	132 +0%

This is how GTS 160M and RTX 4070 SUPER compete in popular games:

RTX 4070 SUPER is 5275% faster in 1080p
RTX 4070 SUPER is 4400% faster in 1440p
RTX 4070 SUPER is 8600% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 4070 SUPER is 15300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RTX 4070 SUPER is ahead in 46 tests (74%)
there's a draw in 16 tests (26%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.76	78.26
Recency	3 March 2009	8 January 2024
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	12 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	220 Watt

GTS 160M has 266.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 4070 SUPER, on the other hand, has a 4346.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 160M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTS 160M is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.