GeForce GTX 1070 Ti vs GeForce GTX 980 Ti: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
Compare with AIRendering and compute
A +47%NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti leads in this scenario (up to 47% in comparable benchmarks).
No comparable benchmarks yet: gaming: rasterization, gaming: ray tracing, power efficiency.
Advantages
Only measured and rated values: a noticeable benchmark gap and specs where more is better.
Where GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is better7
Blender Benchmark 2.90 5.1% lower294 s vs 308 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 24.3% lower296 s vs 368 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 47% lower693 s vs 1,018 s
Blender Benchmark 3.4.0 14.3% faster640 samples/min vs 560 samples/min
Video memory 2 GB more8 GB vs 6 GB
Board power 70 W lower180 W (TDP) vs 250 W (TDP)
Launch price $250 lower$399 vs $649
Where GeForce GTX 980 Ti is better2
Memory bus 128 bit more384 bit vs 256 bit
Memory bandwidth 80.3 GB/s more336.6 GB/s vs 256.3 GB/s
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- 0.4% difference, within the threshold
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti96.2 sGeForce GTX 980 Ti95.8 sPosition among tested models (27, CUDA)
B · 96A · 960100200300400Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. The 0.4% difference is below the noticeable threshold (5%).
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
96.2 s · community measurement, sample 75 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 75 submissions (10 outliers excluded), interquartile range 94.51–97.63; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-31; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
95.8 s · community measurement, sample 38 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 38 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 93.94–99.12; submissions 2020-09-06 to 2021-06-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- A ahead by 5.1%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti293.5 sGeForce GTX 980 Ti308.5 sPosition among tested models (25, CUDA)
A · 294B · 3080200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is ahead by 5.1% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
293.5 s · community measurement, sample 75 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 75 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 280.96–296.59; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-31; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
308.5 s · community measurement, sample 33 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 33 submissions (4 outliers excluded), interquartile range 295.78–316.04; submissions 2020-09-06 to 2021-02-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- 4.2% difference, within the threshold
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti187.6 sGeForce GTX 980 Ti195.4 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
A · 188B · 1950200400600Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. The 4.2% difference is below the noticeable threshold (5%).
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
187.6 s · community measurement, sample 56 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 56 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 179.05–190.86; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-31; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
195.4 s · community measurement, sample 30 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 30 submissions (4 outliers excluded), interquartile range 193.05–203.58; submissions 2020-09-06 to 2021-02-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- A ahead by 24.3%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, koro (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti296 sGeForce GTX 980 Ti368.1 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
A · 296B · 3680200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is ahead by 24.3% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
296 s · community measurement, sample 52 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 52 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 283.33–300.59; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-31; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
368.1 s · community measurement, sample 27 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 27 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 363.27–383.13; submissions 2020-09-06 to 2021-02-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- 1% difference, within the threshold
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti502.9 sGeForce GTX 980 Ti497.8 sPosition among tested models (23, CUDA)
B · 498A · 50305001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. The 1% difference is below the noticeable threshold (5%).
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
502.9 s · community measurement, sample 52 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 52 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 479.86–509.1; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-31; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
497.8 s · community measurement, sample 27 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 27 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 483.58–510.64; submissions 2020-09-06 to 2021-02-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- A ahead by 47%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, victor (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti692.6 sGeForce GTX 980 Ti1,018.5 sPosition among tested models (20, CUDA)
A · 693B · 1,01805001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is ahead by 47% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
692.6 s · community measurement, sample 46 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 46 submissions (8 outliers excluded), interquartile range 663.89–711.48; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-31; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
1,018.5 s · community measurement, sample 24 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 24 submissions (4 outliers excluded), interquartile range 998.23–1095.03; submissions 2020-09-06 to 2021-02-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- A ahead by 14.3%
Blender Benchmark 3.4.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti639.7 samples/minGeForce GTX 980 Ti559.7 samples/minPosition among tested models (43, OptiX)
B · 560A · 64005,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is ahead by 14.3% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
639.7 samples/min · community measurement, sample 42 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 42 submissions (9 outliers excluded), interquartile range 630.75–653.18; submissions 2022-12-08 to 2023-04-12; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
559.7 samples/min · community measurement, sample 20 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 20 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 520.75–576.54; submissions 2023-01-03 to 2023-03-19; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Cycles render in Blender Benchmark. Median of the sum of samples per minute over three scenes after removing outliers.
Other comparable benchmarks (4)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 88 | 92.2 | A +4.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 89.3 | 94.2 | A +5.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 286.1 | 303.8 | A +6.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 633.8 | 545.1 | A +16.3% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (84)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 802.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 802.9 | 1,009.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 88.4 | 94.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 86.8 | 92.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 89.7 | 109.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 89.9 | 115.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 77.7 | 74.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 90 | 104.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 88.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 89.5 | 94.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 91.7 | 100.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 286.5 | 303.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 284.4 | 299.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 285.5 | 295.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 274.6 | 291.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 280 | 296.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 253.8 | 257.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 325.3 | 347.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 338.1 | 400.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 328.2 | 469 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 176.7 | 199.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 178.2 | 204.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 182.2 | 202.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 180.9 | 201.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 176.6 | 233.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 178.1 | 280.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 181.7 | 243.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 168.7 | 214.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 175 | 222.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 178.8 | 273.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 340.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 341.7 | 452.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 338 | 441.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 327.8 | 448.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 291.9 | 433.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 295.3 | 704.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 300.5 | 432.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 195.9 | 218.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 281.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 206.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 480.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 472.5 | 501.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 474.3 | 482.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 485.9 | 498.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 471.7 | 553.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 483.3 | 622.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 447.2 | 424.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 475.9 | 504.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 491.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 501.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 773 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 750.1 | 1,256.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 714.3 | 1,235.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 690.6 | 1,105.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 668.2 | 997.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 745.5 | 1,290.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 734.5 | 1,351.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 650.3 | 898.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 751.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 701.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 687.1 | 597.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 674.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 652.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 667.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 663.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 684 | 706.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 592.8 | 533 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 591.6 | 504.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 495 | 404.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 513.6 | 443 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 658.3 | 592.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 662.6 | 553.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 614.7 | 542.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 635.3 | 526.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 662.4 | 549 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 635.4 | 576.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 596.6 | 533.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 599.7 | 501.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 590.9 | 504.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 587.9 | 483.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 506.8 | 449.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | — | 104.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | — | 339.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | — | 189.4 | no pair |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
| Specification | A · GeForce GTX 1070 Ti | B · GeForce GTX 980 Ti | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | GP104-300-A1 | GM200-310-A1 | differs |
| Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 2,432 (CUDA cores) | 2,816 (CUDA cores) | not directly comparable |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,607 MHz | 1,000 MHz | A: 607 MHz more |
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | 1,683 MHz | 1,076 MHz | A: 607 MHz more |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 8 GB | 6 GB | A: 2 GB more |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | equal |
| Memory bus | 256 bit | 384 bit | B: 128 bit more |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 256.3 GB/s | 336.6 GB/s | B: 80.3 GB/s more |
| Power and dimensions | |||
| Board powerTGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops. | 180 W (TDP) | 250 W (TDP) | B: 70 W higher |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data | no data for B |
Chip
GPU chip
AGP104-300-A1
BGM200-310-A1
differsArchitecture
APascal
BMaxwell
differsShader units
A2,432 (CUDA cores)
B2,816 (CUDA cores)
not directly comparableShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,607 MHz
B1,000 MHz
A: 607 MHz moreBoost clock
A1,683 MHz
B1,076 MHz
A: 607 MHz moreClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit.
Memory
Video memory
A8 GB
B6 GB
A: 2 GB moreMemory type
AGDDR5
BGDDR5
equalMemory bus
A256 bit
B384 bit
B: 128 bit moreMemory bandwidth
A256.3 GB/s
B336.6 GB/s
B: 80.3 GB/s moreExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A180 W (TDP)
B250 W (TDP)
B: 70 W higherTGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops.
Interface
APCIe 3.0 x16
Bno data
no data for B
“More” does not always mean “better”: higher power draw or size is a system requirement, not an advantage (such bars are dimmed).
Compare with AI
An AI model reviews the specs and benchmarks of this pair and gives a plain-language verdict on who each model suits.
Questions and answers
How much video memory do NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti: 8 GB GDDR5, 256-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti: 6 GB GDDR5, 384-bit bus.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
See also
Data sources (2)
- Wikipedia (English) — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti, specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 2026
- Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation) — benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.81, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.81a, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.82, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.83, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.91.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.92, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.93.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.0.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.3.0checked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.