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 TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£960VRAM:16 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):300 W

ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 11 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti
8.4/10

Overall score

Score
8.4/ 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 95% of models
Score components

40%

9.0

Technical score

25%

8.3

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

8.7

Sentiment score

★Better than 95% of graphics cards
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 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 54% of models
Score components

70%

8.4

Overall score

30%

5.4

Price

▲Better than 54%
9.0

Technical score

Technical score
9.0/ 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 83% of models
Score components

44%

8.9

Performance

24%

9.6

Memory

12%

8.0

Power

11%

10

Features

5%

5.5

Design

4%

10

Connectivity

▲Better than 83%
8.3

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.3/ 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
▲ Better than 77% of models

80%

8.3

Average grade

20%

8.6

Popularity

Grades by review (11)
8 reviews: 5 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. 3 video reviews, each 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.
▲Better than 77%
?

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-tuf-gaming-geforce-rtx-5070-ti
asus-tuf-gaming-geforce-rtx-5070-ti
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti

Based on 8 · 3

Reviewers praise its quiet running and overclocking headroom, but find it bulky and short of the mark at 4K.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti

Based on 175 owners sharing their experience in online comments

78%positive11%mixed11%negative

Owners praise its speed and rendering features, while clock glitches, frame drops, and VRAM limits draw the clearest complaints.

What owners dislike

  • Unlocking voltage control in MSI Afterburner can cap boost clocks near 2500 MHz; owners fix it by turning that option off and rebooting.7
  • At native resolution or maxed settings, frame rates drop sharply, with Assassin's Creed Origins at 4K reported at only about 25 fps.5
  • Owners upgrading from a 4070 Ti say the gain is only about 10 percent, and the 9070 XT is sometimes faster in some titles.5
  • Some owners report a game showing 12 GB instead of the card's 16 GB, and heavy VRAM use in Indiana Jones until the texture pool is lowered.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti

Technical score
Technical score
9.0/ 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 83% of models
Score components:

44%

8.9

Performance

24%

9.6

Memory

12%

8.0

Power

11%

10

Features

5%

5.5

Design

4%

10

Connectivity

9.0
Reviews score
8.3
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.5/ 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 54% of models
Score components:

70%

8.4

Overall score

30%

5.4

Price

7.5
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
27,015 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 27,015 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 81.4% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
19,038 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 19,038 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 84.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.4% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
31,326 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 31,326 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 74.3% of graphics cards and equal to 1.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
18,056 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 18,056 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 68.8% of graphics cards and equal to 0.9% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
43.9 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 43.9 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 73.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.3% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
16 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 16 GB of VRAM, which is more than 62% of graphics cards and equal to 28.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR7
This graphics card uses GDDR7 memory, which is newer than on 79.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.4% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
256 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 256 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 50.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 35.5% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
896 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 896 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 82.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
28,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 28,000 MHz, which is faster than that of 78.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 16.8% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
5
This graphics card supports PCIe 5, which is newer than on 73% of graphics cards and equal to 27% 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
2.1b
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 2.1b, which is more advanced than on 77.8% of graphics cards and equal to 22.2% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
38.69 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 38.69 Gbps, which is faster than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
300 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 300 W, which is higher than that of 72.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.4% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
300 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 300 W under peak load, which is higher than 70.3% of graphics cards and equal to 4.4% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
850 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 850 W PSU, which is higher than that of 83.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 11.9% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
330 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 330 W, which is higher than that of 79.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
300 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
329x 140x 62.5 mm
Length
329 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 329 mm long, which is longer than 81% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.9% of graphics cards.
Height
140 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 140 mm tall, which is taller than 79.5% of graphics cards and equal in height to 5.4% of graphics cards.
Slot width
3.12 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 3.12 slot/s, which is wider than 88.5% of graphics cards and equal in width to 0.6% of graphics cards.
Weight
1,616 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1,616 g, which is heavier than 79.9% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of Graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say

ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 2x higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (896 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    896 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 30 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (70 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    70 vs 40
  • 30 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (70 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    70 vs 40
  • 91.7% higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (724.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    724.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • 47.4% faster memory speed
    This graphics card has a higher effective memory speed than the average graphics card (28,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    28,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 96 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (280 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    280 vs 184
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 15.3% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.3/ 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
    ▲ Better than 77% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    8.6

    Popularity

    Grades by review (11)
    8 reviews: 5 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. 3 video reviews, each 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.
    8.3 vs 7.2
  • 30 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (70 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    70 vs 40
  • 30 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (70 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    70 vs 40
  • 91.7% higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (724.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    724.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 96 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (280 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    280 vs 184
  • 136 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (280 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    280 vs 144
  • 32 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (96 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    96 vs 64
  • 19.5% higher base clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher base GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,295 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    2,295 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 94.2% higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (43.9 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    43.9 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 45.9% higher pixel rate
    This graphics card has a higher pixel rate than the average graphics card (235.4 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    235.4 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 2.08x higher ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a higher ray tracing score than the average graphics card (19,038 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    19,038 points vs 9,148 points
  • 82.8% higher gaming score
    This graphics card has a higher gaming score than the average graphics card (27,015 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    27,015 points vs 14,779 points
  • 2 years newer
    This graphics card was released more recently than the average graphics card (2025 vs 2023).
    February 2025
    2025 vs 2023
  • 38.4% higher PassMark score
    This graphics card has a higher PassMark score than the average graphics card (31,326 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    31,326 points vs 22,638 points
  • 9.92x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (352 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS.
    352 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS
  • 5.81x higher INT8 performance
    This graphics card has a higher INT8 performance than the average graphics card (1,406 TOPS vs 242 TOPS). The average graphics card has INT8 performance of 242 TOPS.
    1,406 TOPS vs 242 TOPS
  • 2x higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (896 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    896 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 47.4% faster memory speed
    This graphics card has a higher effective memory speed than the average graphics card (28,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    28,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 16x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (64 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    64 MB vs 4 MB
  • 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
  • Newer GDDR version
    This graphics card uses a newer GDDR version than the average graphics card (GDDR7 vs GDDR6).
    GDDR7 vs GDDR6
  • Newer PCIe version
    This graphics card supports a newer PCIe version than the average graphics card (5 vs 4).
    5 vs 4
  • Newer shader model
    This graphics card supports a newer shader model than the average graphics card (7 vs 6.8).
    7 vs 6.8
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2.1b vs 1.4a).
    2.1b vs 1.4a
  • Newer HDMI version
    This graphics card supports a newer HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1b vs 2.1a).
    2.1b vs 2.1a
  • 12 °C higher thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a higher thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (83 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    83 °C vs 95 °C
  • 39.5% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (300 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    300 W vs 215 W
  • 30.8% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (850 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    850 W vs 650 W
  • 2.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,452 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,452 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 46.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (329 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    329 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 15 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (140 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    140 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.62 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (3.1 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    3.12 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 50% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (330 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    330 W vs 220 W
  • 84.6% more expensive
    ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti is more expensive than the average graphics card (£960 vs £520).
    £960 vs £520
  • 84.6% more expensive
    ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti is more expensive than the average graphics card (£960 vs £520).
    £960 vs £520
  • 2.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,452 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,452 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • 39.5% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (300 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    300 W vs 215 W
  • 30.8% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (850 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    850 W vs 650 W
  • 50% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (330 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    330 W vs 220 W
  • 41.7% higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (17 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    17 W vs 12 W
  • 36.4% higher peak power draw
    This graphics card has a higher peak power draw than the average graphics card (300 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    300 W vs 220 W
  • 46.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (329 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    329 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 15 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (140 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    140 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.62 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (3.1 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    3.12 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 59.4% heavier
    This graphics card is heavier than the average graphics card (1,616 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    1,616 g vs 1,014 g

Video reviews

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

8.0
TheOverclocker
≈ estimated
19/03/2025
Hands-on review · benchmarks, overclocking and noise
Verdict
ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti is a solid, quiet card with a good overclock, but its price is hard to justify in many markets.
6.0
PC Centric
≈ estimated
20/02/2025
Hands-on review · overclocking, gameplay benchmarks and pricing
Verdict
ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti overclocks well, but at current inflated prices it is not worth paying above list price.
9.0
ImWateringPSUs
≈ estimated
20/10/2025
Hands-on review · cooling, design and features
Verdict
ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti is a well-cooled, feature-packed card worth buying at a fair price, even if it sits above rivals.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

10
techpowerup.com
✓ explicit
20/02/2025
Review · Exposed-heatsink design
Verdict
The ASUS TUF Gaming RTX 5070 Ti OC is a sturdy card with an exposed heatsink, boosting to 2610MHz in OC mode, aimed at 1440p, using DLSS for 4K.
9.0
basic-tutorials.com
✓ explicit
12/03/2025
Lab test · Cooling and noise
Verdict
The ASUS TUF Gaming RTX 5070 Ti OC is big, yet cool and quiet, and Quiet BIOS costs 1 to 3 percent performance, suiting 1440p and 4K with DLSS.
8.0
en.gamegpu.com
≈ estimated
30/05/2026
Game benchmarks · Overclock modes
Verdict
The ASUS GeForce RTX 5070 Ti TUF Gaming OC is a solid 1440p card, but 4K often needs upscaling and the Radeon RX 7900 XTX leads in some games.
9.0
basic-tutorials.de
✓ explicit
12/03/2025
Lab test · Cooling and noise
Verdict
The ASUS TUF Gaming RTX 5070 Ti OC is big, yet cool and quiet, and Quiet BIOS costs 1 to 3 percent performance, suiting 1440p and 4K with DLSS.
8.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
20/02/2025
Lab test · Quiet BIOS vs MSI
Verdict
The ASUS GeForce RTX 5070 Ti TUF Gaming OC is a large, heavy card whose Quiet BIOS is nearly silent, suiting buyers who put silence ahead of compact size.
8.8
connect.de
✓ explicit
05/06/2025
Lab test · Resolution and cooling
Verdict
The ASUS TUF Gaming RTX 5070 Ti is a strong 1440p card that handles 4K only with DLSS on, suiting WQHD monitors and living-room TVs.
8.0
clubic.com
✓ explicit
20/02/2025
Lab test · Power and gaming
Verdict
The ASUS TUF Gaming RTX 5070 Ti OC is a strong 1440p card that nearly matches an RTX 4080, though it draws up to 331W and needs an 850W supply.
8.0
fr.gamegpu.com
≈ estimated
03/03/2025
Game benchmarks · 1440p and 4K
Verdict
The ASUS TUF Gaming RTX 5070 Ti OC is a reliable 1440p card, but 4K needs upscaling and the Radeon RX 7900 XTX wins some games.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti

  • Excellent cooling performance, often maintaining temperatures below 64°C under load.
  • Operation is extremely quiet, especially when using the integrated 'Quiet BIOS' mode.
  • Strong generational performance leap for those upgrading from RTX 3070 Ti or older series.
  • Robust build quality featuring a gunmetal gray plastic shroud and a durable metal backplate.
  • Equipped with 16GB of high-speed GDDR7 memory, providing better longevity for high-resolution gaming.
  • Impressive overclocking potential, with some users gaining an additional 7-9% performance.
  • Support for modern features like DLSS 4 with Multi Frame Generation and DisplayPort 2.1.

What customers don't like about ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti

  • Large physical footprint (over 3 slots thick and 330mm long), which may not fit in smaller cases.
  • Market pricing is often significantly higher than the theoretical $749 MSRP due to supply issues.
  • Minimal performance gains for users already owning an RTX 4070 Ti Super or RTX 4080.
  • Higher power consumption compared to the previous generation RTX 4070 Ti.
  • Minimal RGB lighting may be a downside for users seeking a more vibrant aesthetic.

Verdict

The ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti 16GB GDDR7 OC Edition is an enthusiast-level graphics card built on NVIDIA's Blackwell architecture, featuring 8,960 CUDA cores and 16GB of next-gen GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus for a massive 896 GB/s bandwidth. This specific model offers a factory-overclocked boost clock of 2,588 MHz (2,610 MHz in OC mode) and high-performance DLSS 4 support, all housed in a durable 3.125-slot vented exoskeleton with military-grade components and triple Axial-tech fans. Main pros include exceptional 1440p and 4K performance that rivals previous flagship cards, superior thermal management via a phase-change thermal pad, and a versatile dual BIOS switch for quiet operation. However, notable cons include its significant physical footprint that requires a large case, a high 300W power draw necessitating at least an 850W PSU, and a substantial price premium over the baseline MSRP.

Compare ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti 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 TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found