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 4070 Vulcan OC review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£670VRAM:12 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):215 W

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4070 Vulcan OC 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.

7.6/10

Overall score

Score
7.6/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 55% of models
Score components

40%

7.3

Technical score

25%

7.3

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

9.3

Sentiment score

â–²Better than 55% of graphics cards
7.4

Value for money

Value for money
7.4/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components

70%

7.6

Overall score

30%

7.0

Price

â–¼Worse than 54%
7.3

Technical score

Technical score
7.3/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 56% of models
Score components

44%

6.9

Performance

24%

6.3

Memory

12%

8.9

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

4.9

Design

4%

9.5

Connectivity

â–²Better than 56%
7.3

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.3/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models

7.3

Mark 7.6 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

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.
â–¼Worse than 68%
?

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
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £670
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 4070 Vulcan OC

Based on 202 owners sharing their experience in online comments

80%positive10%mixed10%negative

Owners praise its fast, efficient gaming and DLSS gains, while VRAM limits and uneven results remain the main frustrations.

What owners dislike

  • Some owners find it can't hold 60 fps at max settings with ray tracing in demanding AAA games, especially at 4K or in Cyberpunk Overdrive.4
  • Owners say the 8GB limit causes memory shortfalls in some games, and 12GB can limit 4K in newer AAA titles, so DLSS helps.3
  • Some owners report hotspot near 95°C at 4K, memory near 100°C on some cards, and laptop versions throttling in thin chassis.3

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4070 Vulcan OC

Technical score
Technical score
7.3/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 56% of models
Score components:

44%

6.9

Performance

24%

6.3

Memory

12%

8.9

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

4.9

Design

4%

9.5

Connectivity

7.3
Reviews score
7.3
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.4/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components:

70%

7.6

Overall score

30%

7.0

Price

7.4
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
17,000 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 17,000 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 55.3% of graphics cards and equal to 1.7% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
11,463 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 11,463 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 60% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
26,909 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 26,909 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 62.8% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
14,646 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 14,646 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 58.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
30.91 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 30.91 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 63.2% 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)
215 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 215 W, which is lower than that of 49.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.2% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
215 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 215 W under peak load, which is lower than 51.7% of graphics cards and equal to 1.2% 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
240 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 240 W, which is higher than that of 52.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
215 W
Show more
Size
348.5x 159.5x 60.5 mm
Length
348.5 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 348.5 mm long, which is longer than 95.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Height
159.5 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 159.5 mm tall, which is taller than 99% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.2% 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
1950 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1950 g, which is heavier than 88.3% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.4% of Graphics cards.
Show more

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4070 Vulcan OC vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 4.8% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,625 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,625 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 27.8% higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (483 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    483 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 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
  • 36.8% higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (30.9 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    30.91 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 19.2% higher sentiment score
    9.3 vs 7.8
  • 6.57x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (233 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS.
    233 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS
  • 19.2% higher sentiment score
    9.3 vs 7.8
  • 4.8% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,625 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,625 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 27.8% higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (483 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    483 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 36.8% higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (30.9 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    30.91 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 6.57x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (233 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS.
    233 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS
  • 40 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (184 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    184 vs 144
  • 6 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (46 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    46 vs 40
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 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
  • 50% larger L2 cache
    This graphics card has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (36 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    36 MB vs 24 MB
  • 4x higher HDMI bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher HDMI bandwidth than the average graphics card (48 Gbps vs 12 Gbps). The average graphics card has HDMI bandwidth of 12 Gbps.
    48 Gbps vs 12 Gbps
  • 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
  • 66.3 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (348.5 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    348.5 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 34.5 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (159.5 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    159.5 mm vs 125 mm
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 92.3% heavier
    This graphics card is heavier than the average graphics card (1950 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    1,950 g vs 1,014 g
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 28.9% more expensive
    COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4070 Vulcan OC is more expensive than the average graphics card (£670 vs £520).
    £670 vs £520
  • 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 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
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 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
  • 5 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (100 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    100 °C vs 95 °C
  • 66.3 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (348.5 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    348.5 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 34.5 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (159.5 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    159.5 mm vs 125 mm
  • 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
  • 92.3% heavier
    This graphics card is heavier than the average graphics card (1950 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    1,950 g vs 1,014 g

Video reviews

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

9.0
Kudet Tech
≈ estimated
13/05/2023
Hands-on review · game benchmarks and temperatures in a PC build
Verdict
COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4070 Vulcan OC delivers strong 4K and 2K gaming, with cool temperatures and a premium high-end design.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4070 Vulcan OC

  • Integrated iGame Smart LCD display for real-time monitoring and custom GIFs
  • Detachable magnetic screen can be used standalone with the included display dock
  • Physical One-Key Overclock button for instant performance boosts
  • Highly efficient triple-fan cooling system that remains quiet under load
  • Robust build quality with a reinforced support frame to prevent sagging
  • Impressive 1440p gaming performance with advanced DLSS 3 support
  • Premium design aesthetics suitable for high-end custom builds

What customers don't like about COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4070 Vulcan OC

  • Higher price point compared to NVIDIA's Founders Edition and reference models
  • Bulky triple-slot design may not fit in smaller PC cases
  • Requires iGame Center software for full LCD and RGB customization
  • The physical OC button placement can limit the number of available video output ports
  • Substantial weight (nearly 2kg) necessitates the use of a support bracket

Verdict

The Colorful iGame GeForce RTX 4070 Vulcan OC is a high-end custom graphics card based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, featuring 5,888 CUDA cores and 12GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus. It stands out with a factory-overclocked boost clock of 2,625 MHz—accessible via a physical 'One-Key Overclock' button—and a signature detachable magnetic 'iGame Smart LCD' for real-time monitoring and custom GIFs. Main pros include its exceptional triple-fan 'Vortex' cooling system, quiet operation, and premium build quality with a reinforced 'Vulcan Support Frame.' However, its massive triple-slot dimensions (349mm length) and significant price premium over the MSRP of the Founder's Edition may be drawbacks for budget-conscious builders or those with smaller cases.

Compare COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4070 Vulcan 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 4070 Vulcan OC and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found