GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER vs Radeon RX 560X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 560X and GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX 560X
2018
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
8.24

RTX 4070 SUPER outperforms RX 560X by a whopping 848% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5129
Place by popularitynot in top-10013
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data66.35
Power efficiency7.5824.50
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code namePolaris 21AD104
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date11 April 2018 (6 years ago)8 January 2024 (1 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 cores10247168
Core clock speed1175 MHz1980 MHz
Boost clock speed1275 MHz2475 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million35,800 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt220 Watt
Texture fill rate81.60554.4
Floating-point processing power2.611 TFLOPS35.48 TFLOPS
ROPs1680
TMUs64224
Tensor Coresno data224
Ray Tracing Coresno data56

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 3.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x16
Length170 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 16-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount4 GB12 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1313 MHz
Memory bandwidth112.0 GB/s504.2 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
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.

RX 560X 8.24
RTX 4070 SUPER 78.12
+848%

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.

RX 560X 3168
RTX 4070 SUPER 30035
+848%

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 HD21−24
−938%
218
+938%
1440p14−16
−921%
143
+921%
4K9−10
−856%
86
+856%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.75
1440pno data4.19
4Kno data6.97

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 186
+0%
186
+0%
Elden Ring 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 182
+0%
182
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 434
+0%
434
+0%
Metro Exodus 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Valorant 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 159
+0%
159
+0%
Dota 2 173
+0%
173
+0%
Elden Ring 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Far Cry 5 152
+0%
152
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 428
+0%
428
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 173
+0%
173
+0%
Metro Exodus 74
+0%
74
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 139
+0%
139
+0%
Far Cry 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 381
+0%
381
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Valorant 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 148
+0%
148
+0%
Elden Ring 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 148
+0%
148
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
World of Tanks 500−550
+0%
500−550
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 87
+0%
87
+0%
Far Cry 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 265
+0%
265
+0%
Metro Exodus 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 154
+0%
154
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Dota 2 166
+0%
166
+0%
Elden Ring 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 166
+0%
166
+0%
Metro Exodus 74
+0%
74
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 166
+0%
166
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 132
+0%
132
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

This is how RX 560X and RTX 4070 SUPER compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4070 SUPER is 938% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4070 SUPER is 921% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 4070 SUPER is 856% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.24 78.12
Recency 11 April 2018 8 January 2024
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 220 Watt

RX 560X has 193.3% lower power consumption.

RTX 4070 SUPER, on the other hand, has a 848.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 560X 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.


AMD Radeon RX 560X
Radeon RX 560X
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER
GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER

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.


3.9 403 votes

Rate Radeon RX 560X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 4405 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER 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.