GeForce GTX 1070 Ti vs GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 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
B +285.6%NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER leads in this scenario (up to 285.6% 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 better0
No advantages found in our data.
Where GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is better8
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 36.2% lower57 s vs 78 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 51.6% lower124 s vs 188 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 54.7% lower191 s vs 296 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 9.1% lower461 s vs 503 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 35.7% lower510 s vs 693 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 249.4% faster2,067 samples/min vs 592 samples/min
Memory bandwidth 191.7 GB/s more448 GB/s vs 256.3 GB/s
Board power 5 W lower175 W (TDP) vs 180 W (TDP)
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- B ahead by 36.2%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti77.7 sGeForce RTX 2060 SUPER57 sPosition among tested models (31, CUDA)
B · 57A · 780100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is ahead by 36.2% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
77.7 s · community measurement, sample 20 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 20 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 76.96–78.05; submissions 2021-07-12 to 2022-02-25; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER
57 s · community measurement, sample 32 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 32 submissions (4 outliers excluded), interquartile range 56.4–57.77; submissions 2021-07-10 to 2022-02-26; 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.
- 2.4% difference, within the threshold
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti293.5 sGeForce RTX 2060 SUPER300.7 sPosition among tested models (25, CUDA)
A · 294B · 3010200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. The 2.4% difference is below the noticeable threshold (5%).
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 RTX 2060 SUPER
300.7 s · community measurement, sample 127 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 127 submissions (13 outliers excluded), interquartile range 295.53–304.9; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-30; 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.
- B ahead by 51.6%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti187.6 sGeForce RTX 2060 SUPER123.7 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
B · 124A · 1880200400600Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is ahead by 51.6% in this benchmark.
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 RTX 2060 SUPER
123.7 s · community measurement, sample 116 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 116 submissions (13 outliers excluded), interquartile range 121.33–125.24; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-30; 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.
- B ahead by 54.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, koro (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti296 sGeForce RTX 2060 SUPER191.3 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
B · 191A · 2960200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is ahead by 54.7% 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 RTX 2060 SUPER
191.3 s · community measurement, sample 100 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 100 submissions (15 outliers excluded), interquartile range 188.53–194.19; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-30; 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.
- B ahead by 9.1%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti502.9 sGeForce RTX 2060 SUPER461.2 sPosition among tested models (23, CUDA)
B · 461A · 50305001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is ahead by 9.1% in this benchmark.
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 RTX 2060 SUPER
461.2 s · community measurement, sample 102 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 102 submissions (14 outliers excluded), interquartile range 452.8–466.95; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-30; 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.
- B ahead by 35.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, victor (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti692.6 sGeForce RTX 2060 SUPER510.2 sPosition among tested models (20, CUDA)
B · 510A · 69305001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is ahead by 35.7% 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 RTX 2060 SUPER
510.2 s · community measurement, sample 102 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 102 submissions (9 outliers excluded), interquartile range 501.09–522.62; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-30; 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.
- B ahead by 249.4%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce GTX 1070 Ti591.6 samples/minGeForce RTX 2060 SUPER2,067.3 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
A · 592B · 2,06705,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is ahead by 249.4% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
591.6 samples/min · community measurement, sample 24 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 24 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 582.59–600.66; submissions 2025-07-19 to 2026-04-11; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER
2,067.3 samples/min · community measurement, sample 102 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 102 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 2005.87–2124.27; submissions 2025-07-17 to 2026-03-07; 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 (17)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 88 | 63.6 | B +38.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 89.3 | 65.7 | B +36% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 96.2 | 66.3 | B +45.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 285.5 | 292.8 | A +2.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 286.1 | 299.2 | A +4.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 182.2 | 119.7 | B +52.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 180.9 | 126 | B +43.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 338 | 210.8 | B +60.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 474.3 | 450.2 | B +5.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 485.9 | 449.2 | B +8.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 714.3 | 522.2 | B +36.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 633.8 | 2,307.1 | B +264% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 635.3 | 2,288.4 | B +260.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 639.7 | 2,315.7 | B +262% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 662.4 | 2,378.7 | B +259.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 635.4 | 2,450.3 | B +285.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 596.6 | 2,138.1 | B +258.4% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (114)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 802.3 | 1,076.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 802.9 | 1,070.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 88.4 | 63.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 86.8 | 61.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 89.7 | 66 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 89.9 | 69.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 90 | 30.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 88.9 | 30.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 89.5 | 31.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 91.7 | 31.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 286.5 | 298.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 284.4 | 299.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 274.6 | 305.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 280 | 320.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 253.8 | 276.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 325.3 | 161.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 338.1 | 171.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 328.2 | 170.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 176.7 | 115.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 178.2 | 115.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 176.6 | 113 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 178.1 | 120.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 181.7 | 109.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 168.7 | 55.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 175 | 63.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 178.8 | 60.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 340.9 | 207.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 341.7 | 209.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 327.8 | 220.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 291.9 | 179.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 295.3 | 188.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 300.5 | 180.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 195.9 | 118 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 281.2 | 206.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 206.8 | 124.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 480.4 | 439.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 472.5 | 446.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 471.7 | 417 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 483.3 | 430.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 447.2 | 394 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 475.9 | 189.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 491.7 | 195.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 501.4 | 196.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 773 | 520.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 750.1 | 528.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 690.6 | 538.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 668.2 | 481.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 745.5 | 566.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 734.5 | 503.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 650.3 | 230.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 751.1 | 276.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 701.6 | 264.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 687.1 | 1,408 | 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 | 1,328.5 | reference |
| 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 | 1,442.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 684 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 592.8 | 2,099.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 495 | 1,993.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 513.6 | 1,928.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 658.3 | 2,487.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 662.6 | 2,259.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 614.7 | 2,180.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 599.7 | 2,158.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 590.9 | 2,049 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 587.9 | 2,113.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 506.8 | 1,883.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (OPTIX) | — | 1,716.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (OPTIX) | — | 1,792.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | — | 71.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 26.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 30.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 30.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 29.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 31.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | — | 350.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 167.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 161.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 159.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 158.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 169.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 166.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | — | 143.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 57.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 56 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 58.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 56.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 57.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 55.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | — | 222.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 103.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 110.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 106 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 101.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 123.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 119.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | — | 543.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 192.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 189.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 190.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 183.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 193.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 193.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | — | 604.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 260.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 260.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 250.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 245.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 244 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 232.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 1,445.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 1,380.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | — | 1,879.9 | 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 RTX 2060 SUPER | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | GP104-300-A1 | TU106-410-A1 | differs |
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 2,432 (CUDA cores) | 2,176 (CUDA cores) | not directly comparable |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,607 MHz | 1,470 MHz | A: 137 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 | 1,650 MHz | A: 33 MHz more |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 8 GB | 8 GB | equal |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 | differs |
| Memory bus | 256 bit | 256 bit | equal |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 256.3 GB/s | 448 GB/s | B: 191.7 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) | 175 W (TDP) | A: 5 W higher |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data | no data for B |
Chip
GPU chip
AGP104-300-A1
BTU106-410-A1
differsArchitecture
APascal
BTuring
differsShader units
A2,432 (CUDA cores)
B2,176 (CUDA cores)
not directly comparableShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,607 MHz
B1,470 MHz
A: 137 MHz moreBoost clock
A1,683 MHz
B1,650 MHz
A: 33 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
B8 GB
equalMemory type
AGDDR5
BGDDR6
differsMemory bus
A256 bit
B256 bit
equalMemory bandwidth
A256.3 GB/s
B448 GB/s
B: 191.7 GB/s moreExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A180 W (TDP)
B175 W (TDP)
A: 5 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 RTX 2060 SUPER have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti: 8 GB GDDR5, 256-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER: 8 GB GDDR6, 256-bit bus.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti or NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 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 RTX 2060 SUPER, 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 3.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, 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 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.0.0checked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.