Support NeoGAF

[dgrdsv]

nope. I'm okay reducing texture quality with my now ancient 3070
but with brand new 5070? nah. it should have 16 GB VRAM
even 3070 was able to play with maximum texture quality up until 2023. so this is even worse than 3070 at launch

You don't need to reduce anything on a 12GB card unless you're aiming at 4K+PT+FG which is likely too heavy for a 5070's performance anyway.
"Should have" is nice. Are you ready to pay +$100 for something which will help you in half a dozen of games over the card's lifespan?

The fact that it's actually slower than a 4070 ti is pretty crazy.

31 Tflops vs 40 Tflops
$550 vs $800 launch price
Why is this "crazy"?

 

[yamaci17]

You don't need to reduce anything on a 12GB card unless you're aiming at 4K+PT+FG which is likely too heavy for a 5070's performance anyway.
"Should have" is nice. Are you ready to pay +$100 for something which will help you in half a dozen of games over the card's lifespan?

there's literally a comparison above you that shows 4060ti getting 80 FPS with settings that buckles 5070 to single digits. meaning if 5070 had enough VRAM, it would ran the game at the same settings with 140+ FPS

also no, you still can't max out textures in indiana jones without path tracing with 12 GB.

 

[MikeM]

Come on 9070xt!

 

[dgrdsv]

there's literally a comparison above you that shows 4060ti getting 80 FPS with settings that buckles 5070 to single digits. meaning if 5070 had enough VRAM, it would ran the game at the same settings with 140+ FPS

This is a completely flawed comparison because in IJ it is *you* who control how much VRAM the game allocates.
There is no point in using "supreme" level when the quality is the same for everything above "medium" and the only thing which changes is the VRAM allocation.
So basically this is an "issue" which is constructed by hand to show what impact running out of VRAM would produce - but not how you would actually fare on a 12GB card when playing this game in particular.

 

[Throttle]

What a piece of shit. Same performance as 4070S for a little discount? Why, Nvidia? Why didn't you just keep producing the 4000 series instead of going forward with this joke of a launch?

A 4070 super for 399 would be nice, or 449 with gddr7 memory (don't know if possible)

 

[Rosoboy19]

This is a completely flawed comparison because in IJ it is *you* who control how much VRAM the game allocates.
There is no point in using "supreme" level when the quality is the same for everything above "medium" and the only thing which changes is the VRAM allocation.
So basically this is an "issue" which is constructed by hand to show what impact running out of VRAM would produce - but not how you would actually fare on a 12GB card when playing this game in particular.

This is true when comparing the 5070 to 16GB cards in random YouTube reviews. The bigger issue is that Jensen himself made the direct comparison to the 24GB 4090. This opened the door for everyone to highlight the 5070's biggest shortcomings in all sorts of unrealistic scenarios because the comparison itself was unrealistic. Foolish.

 

[SolidQ]

RTX 5050 for 550

 

[Black_Stride]

What's wrong with this one in your view?
5070 launches at $550 (market price is TBD of course but this is true for all GPUs) which puts it at 4070's price position - or 50 below 4070 Super's.
In both comparisons it provides a perf/price improvement. Not enough for the owners of 4070 or Super to upgrade - but this was always a rare occurrence even before we've ran out of production process improvements.
For 3070 owners or prior Turing and Pascal GPUs of ~$500 launch price it is a solid upgrade option at a similar price.

There are some results where 5070 barely beats 4070 which are less than ideal but this one isn't it.

xx70s should at best beat the last gen range topper.
At worst they should match xx80
Generally the xx70 should get you performance near the best of the previous generation +-

This card is trading blows with last gens xx70S.
Doesnt stand a chance vs lastgen xx80.
And is fighting with a two generations old range topper.


Its utter shite.
And before you come at me that xx70s matching range toppers is rare.

We can go back:

• 4070S ~ 3080Ti
• 3070 ~ 2080Ti
• 2070S ~ 1080Ti
• 1070 ~ 980Ti
• 970 ~ 780Ti
• 770 ~ 680
• 670 ~ 580
• 570 ~ 480
• 470 ~ 280
• 260 ~ 9800

Yes im cheating by using two supers in there but even the base 2070 and 4070 were better than what we are looking at here.

 

[poodaddy]

Please AMD....please. Just have a successful launch, all you have to do now is not fuck up the quality assurance and inventory, and you've won. Nvidia desperately needs this wake up call, we need true competition again.

 

[dgrdsv]

This is true when comparing the 5070 to 16GB cards in random YouTube reviews.

I don't know what that means.

The bigger issue is that Jensen himself made the direct comparison to the 24GB 4090. This opened the door for everyone to highlight the 5070's biggest shortcomings in all sorts of unrealistic scenarios because the comparison itself was unrealistic. Foolish.

A single comparison when talking about MFG, yes. All other comparisons were in fact with 4070.
I get that YT dramatize everything because clicks and rage and drama for them literally means money. But why ordinary people do this I'll never understand.

xx70s should at best beat the last gen range topper.
At worst they should match xx80
Generally the xx70 should get you performance near the best of the previous generation +-

There is no "xx70" and there is no "should".
Product names are completely random and mean nothing.
The only thing which matters is performance per price comparison.

Yes im cheating by using two supers in there but even the base 2070 and 4070 were better than what we are looking at here.

The problem isn't that you're cheating, the problem is that you give meaning to the card's name which never was there and also have expectations which aren't based on anything but meaningless names.

 

[Throttle]

What a trash nvidia gen. Im praying for AMD tomorrow, im ready to jump ship

Most reviewers telling people to come back tomorrow. If FSR4 can be modded in DLSS titles this could be a turning point for AMD.

 

[Black_Stride]

There is no "xx70" and there is no "should".
Product names are completely random and mean nothing.
The only thing which matters is performance per price comparison.


The problem isn't that you're cheating, the problem is that you give meaning to the card's name which never was there and also have expectations which aren't based on anything but meaningless names.

Even if we use your prece performance metric.
Its still a bad card considering its nowehere near being a Halo product that can justify its bad price/performance ratio.

Note: The chances of finding a 5070 for 550 might as well be unicorn shit.
Its gonna be 700+ dollars on the street bet.

P.S The names arent arbitrary, its used to signify tiers, they have meaning to them.
I dont know why people over the last two generations have suddenly started saying Nvidias card names are arbitrary?
Justifying purchases or what?
We have since the like what 6000 series we have had a sense of order knowing whats what in the stack, why since the 4070 have people decided the names dont matter?

 

[Rosoboy19]

I don't know what that means.


A single comparison when talking about MFG, yes. All other comparisons were in fact with 4070.
I get that YT dramatize everything because clicks and rage and drama for them literally means money. But why ordinary people do this I'll never understand

I was agreeing that, without Jensens 4090 comment, your "flawed comparison" remark was valid. But he said it. And he got the crowd riled up and made tons of headlines by saying it. Whatever comparisons he made after that to 4070 didn't matter much. Mission accomplished, marketing achieved.

All that aside, most ordinary people would probably prefer their brand new $600+ 5070 gpu to have 16GB VRAM in 2025. Nvidia could certainly afford it.

 

[StereoVsn]

Can't imagine how 8gb cards in 5060 lineup will perform.

If amd is smart, they will put 12gb in 9060 lineup. That will be auto win for them.

The rumors are a 12GB and 16GB cards.

 

[Insane Metal]

LOL what a clusterfuck.

 

[Crayon]

Sorry 12gb being barely enough is not good enough. It's $550 fucking dollars if you're lucky.

 

[Corporal.Hicks]

The RTX5070's performance is lower than expected (even standard 4070ti is faster, let alone the 4070ti super), and with only 12GB of VRAM, I would consider buying the Radeon 9070 even though I prefer nvidia cards.

 

[64gigabyteram]

Sorry 12gb being barely enough is not good enough. It's $550 fucking dollars if you're lucky.

With the pure RT future games are heading in even 16gb is gonna be on the chopping block by 2027.

12gb went from "adequate" to "not enough for RT" in less than 2 years. This is spooky.

 

[Xellos]

It's hard to shake the feeling that Nvidia could have done better for similar price, like this is the bare minimum they could get away with. I guess Nvidia wants to steer 4070/3080 owners towards the more expensive cards like 5070ti and 5080.

I'd love for AMD to be a viable alternative but that's all on FSR4 vs DLSS. AMD will have the performance/dollar advantage at native rendering but if FSR4 isn't comparable to DLSS4 it's going to be tough to give up DLSS.

 

[TheAmazingSpiderMan]

When you're king of the hill why bother. Unless AMD do some serious catching up the future might look like this with the 60 and onwards GPUs

 

[Buggy Loop]

With the pure RT future games are heading in even 16gb is gonna be on the chopping block by 2027.

12gb went from "adequate" to "not enough for RT" in less than 2 years. This is spooky.

Then there's no new cards to buy unless its a 5090. From either Nvidia or AMD.

I honestly don't think so. Neural texture compression to the rescue. AMD is also in on this and has papers on the subject, but this will be directX vendor agnostic feature soon enough I think.

 

[mclaren777]

I feel like the only person who is excited to buy one of these tomorrow.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[YCoCg]

I feel like the only person who is excited to buy one of these tomorrow.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I mean hey, if you can't a 4070 Super this is the next best thing.

 

[nkarafo]

The planned obsolesce with these VRAM configurations is more than obvious. These cards will barely last until the next GPU lineup, let alone for a few years.

When they release the 5060 with 8GB it's gonna be hilarious. Until all the suckers buy it and it becomes No1 used card on STEAM. Then it will be sad.

 

[SportsFan581]

At least they didn't raise the official price to $700. You've got to take the little victories.

 

[SABRE220]

I still cant believe people on here are defending nvidia for this shit....we had this company giving us products like the 8800gt fksakes.

 

[Celcius]

It really annoys me how Nvidia skimps on vram on most of their cards

 

[DownLikeBCPowder]

Not looking great.. so tomorrow we get AMD information ?

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Much to my surprise, my local Microcenter (dallas) will be getting over 70 5070s with over 25 of them being the Asus TUF that is selling for $739.

Graphics Cards : Micro Center

Microcenter.com has the best deals on the latest Nvidia Graphics Cards & AMD Graphics Cards and more available at your local Micro Center Computer Store!

www.microcenter.com

Please dont be a fucking retard and buy this piece of shit GPU, when the 9070XT will likely blow it out of the water.

 

[rofif]

You should have posted the Indiana Jones screencap. 13fps due to 12gb VRAM.

It's the 8gb 3070 all over again.
We are already at a point where even 12gb is not enough for modern games. AMD should really reconsider cancelling that 32gb 9070 XTX.

5070 12gb vs 4060ti 16gb ,

another gpu with gimped vram

Nonsense. This just exposed those who have not played with game settings themselves.
One just needs to play indiana jones and toy with settings for 5 mintues to understand how bugged it is and how bad of a job dev did.
The sec that games goes over vram limit, it drops from whatever 100fps you had, to 5. I've checked, I've tested.

I can run the game at max settings but HIGH textures (not highest). The game overfills my vram and drops to 3fps, I just need to go into settings, move the textures or shadows sliders 1 notch down and back up, and it unlocks the fps again and will not go to a crawl again.

Seriously. my vram limit is around 9700. If I see it hovering around that, the game will drop to 5fps. You just need to touch the settings to unlock it when that happens. And the devs are SO SHITTY, the menu and settings also run at 3fps, so it's actually a pain to get to that setting and change it.

This is a bug and game fault. nothing to do with 12gb. More vram just avoids that bug.
I see this repeated everywhere and it just exposed who played this game on pc and who did not.
People only repeating bs. More vram shouldn't be needed here. it just helps to avoid the bug. Their stupid textures cache setting is broken.

This actually happened to my 4080 Super as well if I tried to max it in 4K. VRAM went over 16GB and then I got Ocarina of Time framerates.
20+ GB is needed now.

Exactly.

 

[64gigabyteram]

This is a bug and game fault. nothing to do with 12gb. More vram just avoids that bug.

. so we need more than 16gb of vram for future cards over 300.

you think devs will stop making bugs in video games? we have to account for worse optimization, more complex games and gaffes like this which fuck up lower VRAM cards. We need more VRAM.

People said that the AMD 32gb 9070 was unnecessary. They're about to see how that statement stacks up in the coming years.

 

[rofif]

. so we need more than 16gb of vram for future cards over 300.

you think devs will stop making bugs in video games? we have to account for worse optimization, more complex games and gaffes like this which fuck up lower VRAM cards. We need more VRAM.

People said that the AMD 32gb 9070 was unnecessary. They're about to see how that statement stacks up in the coming years.

Of course we need more vram.
But this benchmark should not be shared or should come with a disclaimer.
It is a confirmed bug and not a normal behavior when you go ... tiny bit over vram limit. Game should manage that itself.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Nonsense. This just exposed those who have not played with game settings themselves.
One just needs to play indiana jones and toy with settings for 5 mintues to understand how bugged it is and how bad of a job dev did.
The sec that games goes over vram limit, it drops from whatever 100fps you had, to 5. I've checked, I've tested.

I can run the game at max settings but HIGH textures (not highest). The game overfills my vram and drops to 3fps, I just need to go into settings, move the textures or shadows sliders 1 notch down and back up, and it unlocks the fps again and will not go to a crawl again.

Seriously. my vram limit is around 9700. If I see it hovering around that, the game will drop to 5fps. You just need to touch the settings to unlock it when that happens. And the devs are SO SHITTY, the menu and settings also run at 3fps, so it's actually a pain to get to that setting and change it.

This is a bug and game fault. nothing to do with 12gb. More vram just avoids that bug.
I see this repeated everywhere and it just exposed who played this game on pc and who did not.
People only repeating bs. More vram shouldn't be needed here. it just helps to avoid the bug. Their stupid textures cache setting is broken.


Exactly.

Yeah Indiana Jones is one of the buggiest and most annoying games to play. Constant weird glitches. I was constantly getting save corruptions that some times were fixed by a restart, but weird random framerate drops and occasionally after a long cutscene, the game would randomly get stuck at like 49fps. DLSS and frame gen causing all sorts of issues…just ugh.

 

[rofif]

Yeah Indiana Jones is one of the buggiest and most annoying games to play. Constant weird glitches. I was constantly getting save corruptions that some times were fixed by a restart, but weird random framerate drops and occasionally after a long cutscene, the game would randomly get stuck at like 49fps. DLSS and frame gen causing all sorts of issues…just ugh.

Yep. Aside from super annoying vram -> 5fps, I also had more than fe crashes crashes.
Doesn't help that it was one of few new releases that I played on pc... here is to me giving pc another good faith chance.... I ended up toying with settings about as much as playing the game but at least I discovered how vram limit works. Stupid seeing youtubers using bug in benchmarks

 

[winjer]

 

[Topher]

This explains everything....

 

[Fess]

Of course we need more vram.
But this benchmark should not be shared or should come with a disclaimer.
It is a confirmed bug and not a normal behavior when you go ... tiny bit over vram limit. Game should manage that itself.

It's the reality though, and Indy won't be the last one to go OoT when above 16GB. I lowered the settings when playing on my 4080 Super and I hated doing it because it shouldn't be needed on a $3k PC.
It'll be interesting to see what happens with DOOM, same engine there.

 

[adamsapple]

This explains everything....

Took me a second.

 

[mansoor1980]

Nonsense. This just exposed those who have not played with game settings themselves.
One just needs to play indiana jones and toy with settings for 5 mintues to understand how bugged it is and how bad of a job dev did.
The sec that games goes over vram limit, it drops from whatever 100fps you had, to 5. I've checked, I've tested.

I can run the game at max settings but HIGH textures (not highest). The game overfills my vram and drops to 3fps, I just need to go into settings, move the textures or shadows sliders 1 notch down and back up, and it unlocks the fps again and will not go to a crawl again.

Seriously. my vram limit is around 9700. If I see it hovering around that, the game will drop to 5fps. You just need to touch the settings to unlock it when that happens. And the devs are SO SHITTY, the menu and settings also run at 3fps, so it's actually a pain to get to that setting and change it.

This is a bug and game fault. nothing to do with 12gb. More vram just avoids that bug.
I see this repeated everywhere and it just exposed who played this game on pc and who did not.
People only repeating bs. More vram shouldn't be needed here. it just helps to avoid the bug. Their stupid textures cache setting is broken.


Exactly.

look at you rofif , defending a gimped PC gpu ,

 

[64gigabyteram]

Then there's no new cards to buy unless its a 5090. From either Nvidia or AMD.

Exactly. Hence why I said it's spooky. AMD needs to step up and give a higher tier 9070 XTX with at least 24gb of ram IMHO

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Anyone that buys this over a 9070XT is legit fucking retard.

I really hope that for once that you nvidia loyalists can tell Jensen that enough is enough.

Seriously if you're considering a 5070 go and get a 9070XT instead.

 

[Lumpyoatmeal]

Blog Reviews​

Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070 review: definitely not a $549 RTX 4090

There’s an AMD cloud hanging over the RTX 5070.

www.theverge.com

Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070 Review - IGN

www.ign.com

The Nvidia RTX 5070 is even more disappointing than I expected

Nvidia's RTX 5070 is gunning for the 1440p crown, but it fails to stand out from the half dozen other options already available around $550.

www.xda-developers.com

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Founders Edition Review - When AI has to help out on the finish line | igor´sLAB

Yes, what have we here? With the GeForce RTX 5070 FE, NVIDIA has now launched a new graphics card on the market that leaves me somewhat perplexed in many respects. I’m deliberately putting this up…

www.igorslab.de

Videos










Charts​

At 1440p

• 5070 is 0.81x Performance of 5070 Ti
• 5070 is 0.91x Performance of 4070 Ti Super
• 5070 is 0.97x Performance of 4070 Ti
• 5070 is 1.05x Faster than 4070 Super
• 5070 is 1.22x Faster than 4070
• 5070 is 1.55x Faster than 2080 Ti and 3070
• 5070 is 1.61x faster vs 4060 Ti 16GB
• 5070 is 1.78x Faster vs 3060 Ti
• 5070 is 2.35x Faster vs 3060

Via
​

- The Verge + TechPowerUp

​

 

[CrustyBritches]

Out of curiosity I got up early for 6am PST release time. Had Newegg and Best Buy open ready to go on 2 monitors and spammed refresh leading up to 6am. Only one card was available, the $650 MSI Trio, and that was for local pickup for about 2min. All other cards were immediately marked 'Sold Out'.

I believe it was Steve from Gamers Nexus that called this an imaginary card with imaginary price and performance. Founders Edition isn't even launching until later this month because, in reality, this card doesn't even exist.

 

[YCoCg]

Nvidia need to discontinue this card and push out a 5070 Super FAST because it's getting stomped on by AMDs 9070, this shit is embarrassing, the 60/70 series is where most gamers buy at and I'm certain most of us don't even want to see what the hell Nvidia will attempt to shit out as the 5060 at this point.

 

[Gubaldo]