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

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Ultra W OC review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£540VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):310 W

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Ultra W OC Review: Compare 117 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Ultra W OC
7.2/10

Overall score

Score
7.2/ 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
▼ Worse than 60% of models
Score components

40%

6.8

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.6, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

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

10%

6.8

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 60% of graphics cards
7.3

Value for money

Value for money
7.3/ 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
▼ Worse than 62% of models
Score components

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

7.7

Price

▼Worse than 62%
6.8

Technical score

Technical score
6.8/ 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
▼ Worse than 53% of models
Score components

44%

6.0

Performance

24%

6.1

Memory

12%

8.4

Power

11%

9.2

Features

5%

6.3

Design

4%

9.2

Connectivity

▼Worse than 53%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
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
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.6.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

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
  • colorful-igame-geforce-rtx-3070-ti-ultra-w-oc
colorful-igame-geforce-rtx-3070-ti-ultra-w-oc
Where to buy
    N/A~ £540
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What owners say about the COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Ultra W OC

Based on 208 owners sharing their experience in online comments

68%positive15%mixed17%negative

Owners praise its strong gaming performance, while limited VRAM, heat, and power draw hold it back.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say the 8GB of VRAM runs out at 1440p and 4K in newer games, and many wish it had 10GB or 12GB.11
  • Owners report uneven frame rates in some games, with GPU usage stuck around 40–50 percent in Control and frame drops in Watch Dogs Legion.11
  • Owners report memory temperatures near 100°C under load, and copper shims or thermal pad fixes cut them by about 20–40°C.9
  • Owners say the card draws around 300–350 watts under load with overclocking, which is much more than rivals like the RX 6800.5
  • Owners say the card is only slightly faster than a non-Ti 3070 and gains little over the 2080 Ti in many games.4

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Ultra W OC

Technical score
Technical score
6.8/ 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
▼ Worse than 53% of models
Score components:

44%

6.0

Performance

24%

6.1

Memory

12%

8.4

Power

11%

9.2

Features

5%

6.3

Design

4%

9.2

Connectivity

6.8
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.3/ 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
▼ Worse than 62% of models
Score components:

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

7.7

Price

7.3
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
14,000 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 14,000 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 51.8% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
8,921 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 8,921 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 51.4% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
22,588 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 22,588 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 52.5% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
9,438 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 9,438 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 62.6% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
22.12 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 22.12 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 52% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 56.8% of graphics cards and equal to 25.7% 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
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
608 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 608 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 63.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
19,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz, which is faster than that of 48.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 3.2% 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
25.92 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 25.92 Gbps, which is faster than on 51.7% of graphics cards and equal to 4.3% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
310 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 310 W, which is higher than that of 79.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
310 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 310 W under peak load, which is higher than 75.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
650 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 650 W PSU, which is lower than that of 39.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 13.9% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
310 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 310 W, which is higher than that of 74.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
310 W
Show more
Size
310x 131.5x 56 mm
Length
310 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 310 mm long, which is longer than 68.2% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.6% of graphics cards.
Height
131.5 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 131.5 mm tall, which is taller than 64.7% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.3% of graphics cards.
Slot width
3 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 3 slot/s, which is wider than 70.7% of graphics cards and equal in width to 16.8% of graphics cards.
Weight
1,400 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1,400 g, which is heavier than 70.1% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.7% of Graphics cards.
Show more

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Ultra W OC vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 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
  • 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
  • 35.7% higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (608 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    608 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 8 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (48 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    48 vs 40
  • 8 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (48 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    48 vs 40
  • 48 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (192 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    192 vs 144
  • Supports LHR limiting
    This graphics card supports an LHR limiter, while the average graphics card does not. 7.5% of Graphics cards support one.
  • 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
  • 8 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (48 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    48 vs 40
  • 8 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (48 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    48 vs 40
  • 48 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (192 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    192 vs 144
  • 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
  • 35.7% higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (608 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    608 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • Supports LHR limiting
    This graphics card supports an LHR limiter, while the average graphics card does not. 7.5% of Graphics cards support one.
  • 28.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,800 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,800 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 60% larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (8 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    8 nm vs 5 nm
  • 44.2% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (310 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    310 W vs 215 W
  • 18% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,575 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,575 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 32.1% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,188 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,188 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 12.8% lower sentiment score
    6.8 vs 7.8
  • 28.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,800 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,800 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 18% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,575 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,575 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 2 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2021 vs 2023).
    May 2021
    2021 vs 2023
  • 8.6% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (345.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    345.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 32.1% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,188 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,188 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 83.3% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (4 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    4 MB vs 24 MB
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 60% larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (8 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    8 nm vs 5 nm
  • 33.3% larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (392 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    392 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 2.1a).
    2.1 vs 2.1a
  • 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
  • 44.2% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (310 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    310 W vs 215 W
  • 40.9% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (310 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    310 W vs 220 W
  • 13 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (80 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    80 °C vs 67 °C
  • 7.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (43 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    43 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 40.9% higher peak power draw
    This graphics card has a higher peak power draw than the average graphics card (310 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    310 W vs 220 W
  • 0.5 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (3 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    3 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 27.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (310 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    310 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 6.5 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (131.5 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    131.5 mm vs 125 mm
  • 38.1% heavier
    This graphics card is heavier than the average graphics card (1,400 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    1,400 g vs 1,014 g

Video reviews

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

Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Ultra W OC

  • Excellent gaming performance at 1080p and 1440p resolution
  • Unique white aesthetic with holographic accents suitable for themed PC builds
  • Physical 'Turbo' BIOS switch on the I/O panel for easy one-key overclocking
  • Solid build quality with a nickel-plated heatsink and metal backplate
  • Good undervolting potential to significantly improve thermal efficiency
  • Impressive out-of-the-box clock speeds compared to standard 3070 Ti models

What customers don't like about COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Ultra W OC

  • High stock temperatures, sometimes reaching 80-90°C under heavy load
  • Fans can become noticeably loud during intense gaming sessions
  • Large triple-slot design may not fit in compact or smaller cases
  • Limited global availability outside of Asian markets, making warranty claims difficult in some regions
  • Bundled control software is often described as unintuitive or clunky
  • Higher power consumption compared to some competing 3070 Ti variants

Verdict

The Colorful iGame GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Ultra W OC is an Ampere-based graphics card featuring 6144 CUDA cores and 8GB of high-speed GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering a 608.3 GB/s bandwidth. It operates with a base clock of 1575 MHz and a boosted one-key overclock of 1800 MHz, housed in a triple-slot white shroud with a triple-fan cooling system and customisable RGB. Main pros include its distinctive white aesthetic, the convenient physical one-key turbo button for instant performance gains, and solid 1440p gaming performance. However, some users have noted that the card can run significantly hotter than competitors under heavy load, sometimes reaching 80°C or higher, which may necessitate undervolting or improved case airflow.

Compare COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Ultra W OC 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 COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Ultra W OC and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found