GeForce GTX 1070 vs GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU 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 +167.8%NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU leads in this scenario (up to 167.8% 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
Video memory 4 GB more8 GB vs 4 GB
Memory bus 128 bit more256 bit vs 128 bit
Where GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU is better3
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 26.8% lower71 s vs 90 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 151.5% lower43 s vs 108 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 146.7% faster1,292 samples/min vs 524 samples/min
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions. Laptop chip results depend on the laptop model: its maker sets the power limit and cooling.
- B ahead by 26.8%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 107090.2 sGeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU71.1 sPosition among tested models (31, CUDA)
B · 71A · 900100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU is ahead by 26.8% 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 RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU
71.1 s · community measurement, sample 36 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 36 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 65.13–80.73; submissions 2021-07-15 to 2022-02-24; 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 151.5%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070108.3 sGeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU43.1 sPosition among tested models (20, OptiX)
B · 43A · 108050100150Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU is ahead by 151.5% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
108.3 s · community measurement, sample 20 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 20 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 106.84–111.79; submissions 2021-07-21 to 2022-02-27; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU
43.1 s · community measurement, sample 26 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 26 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 39.66–46; submissions 2021-07-31 to 2022-02-23; OPTIX 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.
- 0.3% difference, within the threshold
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070317.9 sGeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU317.1 sPosition among tested models (26, CUDA)
B · 317A · 3180200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. The 0.3% difference is below the noticeable threshold (5%).
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
317.9 s · community measurement, sample 54 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 54 submissions (8 outliers excluded), interquartile range 310.1–327.85; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-02-24; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU
317.1 s · community measurement, sample 20 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 20 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 304.56–333.41; submissions 2021-07-30 to 2022-02-23; 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 146.7%
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 RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU1,291.7 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
A · 524B · 1,29205,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU is ahead by 146.7% 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 RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU
1,291.7 samples/min · community measurement, sample 92 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 92 submissions (12 outliers excluded), interquartile range 1138.79–1369.38; submissions 2025-07-18 to 2026-03-06; 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 (11)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 534.5 | 1,286 | B +140.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 567.2 | 1,375.7 | B +142.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 572.3 | 1,336.6 | B +133.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 567.4 | 1,416.9 | B +149.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 567.6 | 1,399.8 | B +146.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 573.3 | 1,449.7 | B +152.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 574 | 1,537.1 | B +167.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 540.2 | 1,339.5 | B +148% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 548 | 1,312.8 | B +139.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 522.5 | 1,311.8 | B +151% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 527.1 | 1,202.8 | B +128.2% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (96)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 988.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 1,012.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 103.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 104.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 102.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 105.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 112.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 105.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 104.2 | 81.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 108.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 162.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 107.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 109.1 | 40.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 351.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 361.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 353.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 363.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 365.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 329.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 351.7 | 263.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 396.6 | — | no pair |
| 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 | 159.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 412.9 | 135 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 205.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 208.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 211.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 213 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 217.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 204 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 208.4 | 159.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 211.5 | 144.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 205.8 | — | no pair |
| 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 | 88.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 213.2 | 79.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 401.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 408.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 401 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 393.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (CUDA) | 359.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 345.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 362.2 | 262.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 369 | 249.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 239.7 | — | no pair |
| 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 | 187.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 247.4 | 166 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 575.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 580.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 575.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 588.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 604.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 558.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 582.9 | 512.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 550.6 | 437.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 579 | — | no pair |
| 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 | 198.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 592.5 | 192.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 836.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 906.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 878.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 807.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (CUDA) | 800.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 763.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 867.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 850.4 | 3,189.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 778.6 | — | no pair |
| 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 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 848.4 | 298.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 705.2 | 691.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 639.5 | 707.3 | 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 | 697.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 619.2 | 788.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 647.6 | 616.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 631.4 | 646.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 653 | — | no pair |
| 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 | 165.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 606.7 | 889.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 628.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 449.5 | 1,287.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 474.2 | 1,110.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 624.6 | 1,264.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 567.1 | 1,274 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 461.2 | 1,202.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 908.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | — | 1,109 | no pair |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
Chip maker values. The laptop maker sets the power limit and clocks in each laptop.
| Specification | A · GeForce GTX 1070 | B · GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | GP104-200-A1 | no data | no data for B |
| Architecture | Pascal | Ampere | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 1,920 (CUDA cores) | 2,560 (CUDA cores) | not directly comparable |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,506 MHz | no data | no data for B |
| 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 | 1,035–1,695 MHz | not directly comparable |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 8 GB | 4 GB | A: 4 GB more |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 | differs |
| Memory bus | 256 bit | 128 bit | A: 128 bit more |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 256.3 GB/s | no data | no data for B |
| 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) | no data | no data for B |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data | no data for B |
Chip
GPU chip
AGP104-200-A1
Bno data
no data for BArchitecture
APascal
BAmpere
differsShader units
A1,920 (CUDA cores)
B2,560 (CUDA cores)
not directly comparableShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,506 MHz
Bno data
no data for BBoost clock
A1,683 MHz
B1,035–1,695 MHz
not directly comparableClocks 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
B4 GB
A: 4 GB moreMemory type
AGDDR5
BGDDR6
differsMemory bus
A256 bit
B128 bit
A: 128 bit moreMemory bandwidth
A256.3 GB/s
Bno data
no data for BExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A150 W (TDP)
Bno data
no data for BTGP (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 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070: 8 GB GDDR5, 256-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU: 4 GB GDDR6, 128-bit bus.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 or NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
See also
Data sources (3)
- Wikipedia (English) — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070, release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 2026
- NVIDIA — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPUchecked November 7, 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 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, 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.