Radeon Pro Vega II vs GeForce GTX 1070 SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 1070 SLI with Radeon Pro Vega II, including specs and performance data.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 136 | 138 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 6.44 |
| Power efficiency | 9.48 | 5.97 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | GCN 5.1 (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | Pascal GP104 SLI | Vega 20 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 16 August 2016 (9 years ago) | 3 June 2019 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $2,199 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 3840 | 4096 |
| Core clock speed | 1506 MHz | 1574 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1683 MHz | 1720 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 14400 Million | 13,230 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 300 Watt | 475 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 440.3 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 14.09 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 64 |
| TMUs | no data | 256 |
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).
| Interface | no data | Apple MPX |
| Width | no data | Quad-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
| SLI options | + | - |
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 | GDDR5 | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2x 8 GB | 32 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 4096 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 806 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 825.3 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 Connectors | no data | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 4x Thunderbolt |
| HDMI | - | + |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| VR Ready | + | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | + | 1.3 |
| CUDA | + | - |
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 | 118
+7.3%
| 110−120
−7.3%
|
| 4K | 56
+1.8%
| 55−60
−1.8%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 19.99 |
| 4K | no data | 39.98 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+4%
|
200−210
−4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+2.4%
|
85−90
−2.4%
|
| God of War | 90−95
+5.9%
|
85−90
−5.9%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
+8.3%
|
120−130
−8.3%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+4%
|
200−210
−4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+2.4%
|
85−90
−2.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 120−130
+9.1%
|
110−120
−9.1%
|
| Fortnite | 280
+3.7%
|
270−280
−3.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140−150
+3.6%
|
140−150
−3.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+7.3%
|
110−120
−7.3%
|
| God of War | 90−95
+5.9%
|
85−90
−5.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+6.4%
|
140−150
−6.4%
|
| Valorant | 220−230
+0.5%
|
220−230
−0.5%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
+8.3%
|
120−130
−8.3%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+4%
|
200−210
−4%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+3%
|
270−280
−3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+2.4%
|
85−90
−2.4%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
+2.1%
|
140−150
−2.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 120−130
+9.1%
|
110−120
−9.1%
|
| Fortnite | 176
+3.5%
|
170−180
−3.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140−150
+3.6%
|
140−150
−3.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+7.3%
|
110−120
−7.3%
|
| God of War | 90−95
+5.9%
|
85−90
−5.9%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 87
+2.4%
|
85−90
−2.4%
|
| Metro Exodus | 85−90
+4.7%
|
85−90
−4.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+6.4%
|
140−150
−6.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 111
+0.9%
|
110−120
−0.9%
|
| Valorant | 220−230
+0.5%
|
220−230
−0.5%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
+8.3%
|
120−130
−8.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+2.4%
|
85−90
−2.4%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
+2.1%
|
140−150
−2.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 120−130
+9.1%
|
110−120
−9.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140−150
+3.6%
|
140−150
−3.6%
|
| God of War | 90−95
+5.9%
|
85−90
−5.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+6.4%
|
140−150
−6.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 73
+4.3%
|
70−75
−4.3%
|
| Valorant | 220−230
+0.5%
|
220−230
−0.5%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 123
+2.5%
|
120−130
−2.5%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+3.3%
|
90−95
−3.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 260−270
+0.4%
|
260−270
−0.4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 75−80
+1.3%
|
75−80
−1.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
+10%
|
50−55
−10%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+2.9%
|
170−180
−2.9%
|
| Valorant | 250−260
+1.2%
|
250−260
−1.2%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 95−100
+2.1%
|
95−100
−2.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+7.5%
|
40−45
−7.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 90−95
+1.1%
|
90−95
−1.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 100−110
+6%
|
100−105
−6%
|
| God of War | 45−50
+8.9%
|
45−50
−8.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 70−75
+7.7%
|
65−70
−7.7%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 95−100
+4.2%
|
95−100
−4.2%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+7.5%
|
40−45
−7.5%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 81
+1.3%
|
80−85
−1.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35
+13.3%
|
30−33
−13.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 54
+8%
|
50−55
−8%
|
| Valorant | 220−230
+4.1%
|
220−230
−4.1%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+9.1%
|
55−60
−9.1%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+7.5%
|
40−45
−7.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+11.1%
|
18−20
−11.1%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+8%
|
100−105
−8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+8.9%
|
45−50
−8.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+1.4%
|
70−75
−1.4%
|
| God of War | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 50−55
+11.1%
|
45−50
−11.1%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 38
+8.6%
|
35−40
−8.6%
|
This is how GTX 1070 SLI and Pro Vega II compete in popular games:
- GTX 1070 SLI is 7% faster in 1080p
- GTX 1070 SLI is 2% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 37.35 | 37.22 |
| Recency | 16 August 2016 | 3 June 2019 |
| Chip lithography | 16 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 300 Watt | 475 Watt |
GTX 1070 SLI has a 0.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 58.3% lower power consumption.
Pro Vega II, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 1070 SLI and Radeon Pro Vega II.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 1070 SLI is a desktop graphics card while Radeon Pro Vega II is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
