OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 4070 Super Evo OC Edition review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£610VRAM:12 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):220 W

ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 4070 Super Evo OC Edition Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 1 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 4070 Super Evo OC Edition
7.8/10

Overall score

Score
7.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 62% of models
Score components

40%

7.7

Technical score

25%

7.6

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

9.0

Sentiment score

▲Better than 62% of graphics cards
7.6

Value for money

Value for money
7.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 62% of models
Score components

70%

7.8

Overall score

30%

7.3

Price

▲Better than 62%
7.7

Technical score

Technical score
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 62% of models
Score components

44%

7.7

Performance

24%

6.4

Memory

12%

7.8

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

8.3

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

▲Better than 62%
7.6

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.6/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 61% of models

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 61%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-4070-super-evo-white-oc-edition
Where to buy
    N/A~ £610
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 4070 Super Evo OC Edition

Technical score
Technical score
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 62% of models
Score components:

44%

7.7

Performance

24%

6.4

Memory

12%

7.8

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

8.3

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

7.7
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 62% of models
Score components:

70%

7.8

Overall score

30%

7.3

Price

7.6
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
22,000 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 22,000 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 70.7% of graphics cards and equal to 1.5% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
11,600 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 11,600 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 60.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
29,957 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 29,957 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 70.4% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
17,016 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 17,016 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 66% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
35.5 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 35.5 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 67.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
12 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 12 GB of VRAM, which is more than 46% of graphics cards and equal to 16% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6X
This graphics card uses GDDR6X memory, which is newer than on 57.1% of graphics cards and equal to 22.4% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
192 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 192 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 31.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 18.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
504.2 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 504.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 56.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.2% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
21,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 21,000 MHz, which is faster than that of 61.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 12.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.5% of graphics cards and equal to 50.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.8% of graphics cards and equal to 77.2% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.3% of graphics cards and equal to 46.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
32.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 32.4 Gbps, which is faster than on 56.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
220 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 220 W, which is higher than that of 50.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.2% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
220 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 220 W under peak load, which is lower than 47.8% of graphics cards and equal to 3.6% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
750 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 750 W PSU, which is higher than that of 65.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 16.8% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
220 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W, which is lower than that of 49.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.7% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
220 W
Show more
Size
227.2x 123.24x 49.6 mm
Length
227.2 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 227.2 mm long, which is shorter than 82.2% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.6% of graphics cards.
Height
123.24 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 123.24 mm tall, which is shorter than 53.8% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2.56 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2.56 slot/s, which is wider than 64.9% of graphics cards and equal in width to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Weight
687 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 687 g, which is lighter than 79% of Graphics cards.
Show more

ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 4070 Super Evo OC Edition vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 16 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (56 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    56 vs 40
  • 49.3% higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (564.5 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    564.5 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 16 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (56 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    56 vs 40
  • 55 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (227.2 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    227.2 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 80 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (224 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    224 vs 144
  • 1.8% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,550 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,550 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 57.1% higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (35.5 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    35.5 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 16 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (80 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    80 vs 64
  • 15.4% higher sentiment score
    9.0 vs 7.8
  • 5.6% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.6/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 61% of models

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.6 vs 7.2
  • 16 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (56 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    56 vs 40
  • 49.3% higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (564.5 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    564.5 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 16 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (56 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    56 vs 40
  • 80 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (224 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    224 vs 144
  • 1.8% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,550 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,550 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 57.1% higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (35.5 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    35.5 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 16 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (80 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    80 vs 64
  • 40 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (224 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    224 vs 184
  • 22.8% higher pixel rate
    This graphics card has a higher pixel rate than the average graphics card (198 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    198 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 32.3% higher PassMark score
    This graphics card has a higher PassMark score than the average graphics card (29,957 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    29,957 points vs 22,638 points
  • 48.9% higher gaming score
    This graphics card has a higher gaming score than the average graphics card (22,000 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    22,000 points vs 14,779 points
  • 2x larger L2 cache
    This graphics card has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (48 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    48 MB vs 24 MB
  • 12x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (48 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    48 MB vs 4 MB
  • 10.5% faster memory speed
    This graphics card has a higher effective memory speed than the average graphics card (21,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    21,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 12.5% higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (504.2 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    504.2 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 55 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (227.2 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    227.2 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.
  • 25% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,313 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,313 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 15.4% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (750 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    750 W vs 650 W
  • 10 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (105 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    105 °C vs 95 °C
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.7 vs 6.8).
    6.7 vs 6.8
  • 5 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (42 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    42 °C vs 37 °C
  • 25% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,313 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,313 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.7 vs 6.8).
    6.7 vs 6.8
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (5 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    5 vs 6
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • 15.4% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (750 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    750 W vs 650 W
  • 10 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (105 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    105 °C vs 95 °C
  • 5 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (42 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    42 °C vs 37 °C
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
ErockOnTech
≈ estimated
06/01/2025
Retrospective review · benchmarks at 1440p and 4K, noise and power
Verdict
The ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 4070 Super Evo OC Edition is quiet, stable and strong at 1440p, though the all-white partner model costs more than the reference price.
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict

Third-party reviews

What customers like about ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 4070 Super Evo OC Edition

  • Excellent 1440p gaming performance with support for DLSS 3.5 and Frame Generation.
  • Efficient power consumption compared to previous generation high-end cards.
  • Compact 2.5-slot design makes it compatible with many small form factor cases.
  • Highly praised aesthetic, particularly the clean white finish for themed builds.
  • Dual BIOS switch allows for a 'Quiet Mode' that significantly reduces fan noise.
  • Build quality is solid, featuring a reinforced aluminum backplate for rigidity.

What customers don't like about ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 4070 Super Evo OC Edition

  • 12GB of VRAM is viewed by some as a potential bottleneck for future ultra-demanding titles.
  • High price point (the 'Nvidia tax') when compared to some AMD competitors.
  • Mixed reviews on noise; while many find it silent, some report noticeable fan whine or loud operation under 100% load without tuning.
  • Stock cooling can run warmer (75-80°C) in smaller cases without manual fan curve adjustments or undervolting.
  • The 16-pin power connector (12VHPWR) can be cumbersome or require adapters for older power supplies.

Verdict

The ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 4070 Super Evo OC Edition is a compact, SFF-ready graphics card featuring 7,168 CUDA cores and 12GB of high-speed GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit interface. Built on the ultra-efficient Ada Lovelace architecture, this factory-overclocked model delivers a boost clock of 2,550 MHz in OC mode and supports advanced AI features like NVIDIA DLSS 3 frame generation and 3rd Gen Ray Tracing. Its primary advantages include a sleek all-white aesthetic, a space-saving 2.5-slot design ideal for small builds, and superior thermal management via dual Axial-tech fans with 0dB silent technology. However, some users have noted that the 12GB VRAM may limit longevity in future ultra-demanding titles, and the card can become audible under heavy sustained loads compared to larger triple-fan variants.

Compare ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 4070 Super Evo OC Edition with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 4070 Super Evo OC Edition and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found