GeForce GTX 1070 vs GeForce GTX 1070 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
B +27.2%NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti leads in this scenario (up to 27.2% 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 is better2
Board power 30 W lower150 W (TDP) vs 180 W (TDP)
Launch price $20 lower$379 vs $399
Where GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is better8
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 16.1% lower78 s vs 90 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 24.5% lower294 s vs 365 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 15.8% lower188 s vs 217 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 21.5% lower296 s vs 360 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 20.2% lower503 s vs 604 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 15.6% lower693 s vs 800 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 13% faster592 samples/min vs 524 samples/min
Shader units 512 more2,432 (CUDA cores) vs 1,920 (CUDA cores)
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- B ahead by 16.1%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 107090.2 sGeForce GTX 1070 Ti77.7 sPosition among tested models (31, CUDA)
B · 78A · 900100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is ahead by 16.1% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
90.2 s · community measurement, sample 83 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 83 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 88.16–91.66; submissions 2021-07-11 to 2022-02-28; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · 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.
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 24.5%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070365.3 sGeForce GTX 1070 Ti293.5 sPosition among tested models (25, CUDA)
B · 294A · 3650200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is ahead by 24.5% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
365.3 s · community measurement, sample 179 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 179 submissions (23 outliers excluded), interquartile range 355.81–376.18; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-10-14; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · 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.
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 15.8%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070217.2 sGeForce GTX 1070 Ti187.6 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
B · 188A · 2170200400600Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is ahead by 15.8% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
217.2 s · community measurement, sample 159 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 159 submissions (15 outliers excluded), interquartile range 212.58–221.75; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-10-14; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · 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.
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 21.5%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, koro (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070359.7 sGeForce GTX 1070 Ti296 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
B · 296A · 3600200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is ahead by 21.5% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
359.7 s · community measurement, sample 157 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 157 submissions (10 outliers excluded), interquartile range 350.81–370.44; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-10-14; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · 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.
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 20.2%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070604.4 sGeForce GTX 1070 Ti502.9 sPosition among tested models (23, CUDA)
B · 503A · 60405001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is ahead by 20.2% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
604.4 s · community measurement, sample 154 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 154 submissions (14 outliers excluded), interquartile range 591.84–621.3; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-10-14; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · 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.
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 15.6%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, victor (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070800.4 sGeForce GTX 1070 Ti692.6 sPosition among tested models (20, CUDA)
B · 693A · 80005001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is ahead by 15.6% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
800.4 s · community measurement, sample 138 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 138 submissions (22 outliers excluded), interquartile range 784.18–821.9; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-10-14; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · 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.
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 13%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce GTX 1070523.6 samples/minGeForce GTX 1070 Ti591.6 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
A · 524B · 59205,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is ahead by 13% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
523.6 samples/min · community measurement, sample 72 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 72 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 509.18–537.94; submissions 2025-07-25 to 2026-03-05; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · 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.
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 (20)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 103.4 | 88.4 | B +17% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 104.1 | 86.8 | B +19.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 102.9 | 88 | B +16.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 105.6 | 89.3 | B +18.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 112.1 | 96.2 | B +16.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 351.4 | 286.5 | B +22.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 353.4 | 285.5 | B +23.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 363.8 | 286.1 | B +27.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 211.7 | 182.2 | B +16.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 213 | 180.9 | B +17.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 401 | 338 | B +18.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 575.1 | 474.3 | B +21.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 588.2 | 485.9 | B +21.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 878.9 | 714.3 | B +23% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 567.2 | 633.8 | B +11.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 567.4 | 635.3 | B +12% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 567.6 | 639.7 | B +12.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 573.3 | 662.4 | B +15.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 574 | 635.4 | B +10.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 540.2 | 596.6 | B +10.4% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (82)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 988.7 | 802.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 1,012.7 | 802.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 105.4 | 89.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 104.2 | 89.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 108.5 | 90 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 162.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 107.8 | 88.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 109.1 | 89.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 108.3 | 91.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 361.2 | 284.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 329.9 | 274.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 351.7 | 280 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 317.9 | 253.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 396.6 | 325.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 630.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 389.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 386.7 | 338.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 412.9 | 328.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 205.9 | 176.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 208.3 | 178.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 204 | 176.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 208.4 | 178.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 211.5 | 181.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 205.8 | 168.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 322.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 200.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 204.8 | 175 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 213.2 | 178.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 401.4 | 340.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 408.8 | 341.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 393.7 | 327.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 345.7 | 291.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 362.2 | 295.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 369 | 300.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 239.7 | 195.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 377.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 228.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 316.7 | 281.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 247.4 | 206.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 575.7 | 480.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 580.5 | 472.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 558.8 | 471.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 582.9 | 483.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 550.6 | 447.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 579 | 475.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 873.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 560.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 558.4 | 491.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 592.5 | 501.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 836.2 | 773 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 906.2 | 750.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 807.6 | 690.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 763.4 | 668.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 867.1 | 745.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 850.4 | 734.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 778.6 | 650.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 1,202.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 752.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 818.9 | 751.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 848.4 | 701.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 705.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 639.5 | 687.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 642.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 653.8 | 674.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 619.2 | 652.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 647.6 | 667.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 631.4 | 663.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 653 | 684 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 610.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 662.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 606.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 628.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 534.5 | 592.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 449.5 | 495 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 474.2 | 513.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 624.6 | 658.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 567.1 | 662.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 572.3 | 614.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 548 | 599.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 522.5 | 590.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 527.1 | 587.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 461.2 | 506.8 | reference |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
| Specification | A · GeForce GTX 1070 | B · GeForce GTX 1070 Ti | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | GP104-200-A1 | GP104-300-A1 | differs |
| Architecture | Pascal | Pascal | equal |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 1,920 (CUDA cores) | 2,432 (CUDA cores) | B: 512 more |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,506 MHz | 1,607 MHz | B: 101 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 | 1,683 MHz | equal |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 8 GB | 8 GB | equal |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | equal |
| Memory bus | 256 bit | 256 bit | equal |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 256.3 GB/s | 256.3 GB/s | equal |
| 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. | 150 W (TDP) | 180 W (TDP) | B: 30 W higher |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 | equal |
Chip
GPU chip
AGP104-200-A1
BGP104-300-A1
differsArchitecture
APascal
BPascal
equalShader units
A1,920 (CUDA cores)
B2,432 (CUDA cores)
B: 512 moreShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,506 MHz
B1,607 MHz
B: 101 MHz moreBoost clock
A1,683 MHz
B1,683 MHz
equalClocks 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
BGDDR5
equalMemory bus
A256 bit
B256 bit
equalMemory bandwidth
A256.3 GB/s
B256.3 GB/s
equalExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A150 W (TDP)
B180 W (TDP)
B: 30 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
BPCIe 3.0 x16
equal
“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 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070: 8 GB GDDR5, 256-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti: 8 GB GDDR5, 256-bit bus.
Which PCIe interface do the cards use?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070: PCIe 3.0 x16. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti: PCIe 3.0 x16.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 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, specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 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 3.0.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.0, 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 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0checked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.