Riva TNT2 vs GeForce RTX 4070

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce RTX 4070 and Riva TNT2, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RTX 4070
2023
12 GB GDDR6X, 200 Watt
69.95
+699400%

RTX 4070 outperforms Riva TNT2 by a whopping 699400% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking201519
Place by popularity32not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation60.24no data
Power efficiency24.34no data
ArchitectureAda Lovelace (2022−2024)Fahrenheit (1998−2000)
GPU code nameAD104NV5
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date12 April 2023 (1 year ago)12 October 1999 (25 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 no data

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 cores5888no data
Core clock speed1920 MHz125 MHz
Boost clock speed2475 MHzno data
Number of transistors35,800 million15 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm250 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Wattno data
Texture fill rate455.40.25
Floating-point processing power29.15 TFLOPSno data
ROPs642
TMUs1842
Tensor Cores184no data
Ray Tracing Cores46no data

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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16AGP 4x
Length240 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 16-pinNone

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 typeGDDR6XSDR
Maximum RAM amount12 GB16 MB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1313 MHz150 MHz
Memory bandwidth504.2 GB/s2.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 Connectors1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a1x VGA
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)6.0
Shader Model6.7no data
OpenGL4.61.2
OpenCL3.0N/A
Vulkan1.3N/A
CUDA8.9-

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.

RTX 4070 69.95
+699400%
Riva TNT2 0.01

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.

RTX 4070 26985
+899400%
Riva TNT2 3

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 HD219-0−1
1440p124-0−1
4K76-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.74no data
1440p4.83no data
4K7.88no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 216 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 140−150 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 120−130 0−1
Battlefield 5 220−230 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 110−120 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 174 0−1
Far Cry 5 110−120 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 170−180 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 0−1
Hitman 3 120−130 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 250−260 0−1
Metro Exodus 150−160 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 120−130 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 290−300 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 150−160 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 140−150 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 120−130 0−1
Battlefield 5 220−230 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 110−120 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 143 0−1
Far Cry 5 110−120 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 170−180 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 0−1
Hitman 3 120−130 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 250−260 0−1
Metro Exodus 150−160 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 120−130 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 376 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 150−160 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 150−160 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 140−150 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 120−130 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 110−120 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 128 0−1
Far Cry 5 110−120 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 0−1
Hitman 3 120−130 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 293 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 322 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 170 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 124 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 120−130 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 160−170 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 110−120 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 85−90 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 81 0−1
Far Cry 5 80−85 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 270−280 0−1
Hitman 3 100−110 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 222 0−1
Metro Exodus 143 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 222 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 120−130 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 230−240 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 110−120 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70 0−1
Hitman 3 60−65 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 220−230 0−1
Metro Exodus 110−120 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 115 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 36 0−1
Far Cry 5 50−55 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 120−130 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 121 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 50 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 69.95 0.01
Recency 12 April 2023 12 October 1999
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 16 MB
Chip lithography 5 nm 250 nm

RTX 4070 has a 699400% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 23 years, a 76700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 4900% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4070 is our recommended choice as it beats the Riva TNT2 in performance tests.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070
GeForce RTX 4070
NVIDIA Riva TNT2
Riva TNT2

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.1 9090 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 14 votes

Rate Riva TNT2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.