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

Manli GeForce RTX 4070 Super Polar Fox M2609 N693 review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£620VRAM:12 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):220 W

Manli GeForce RTX 4070 Super Polar Fox M2609 N693 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.

Manli GeForce RTX 4070 Super Polar Fox M2609 N693
7.7/10

Overall score

Score
7.7/ 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%

7.7

Overall score

30%

7.2

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 61% of models
Score components

44%

7.6

Performance

24%

6.3

Memory

12%

7.9

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

8.8

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

▲Better than 61%
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%

8.3

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
  • manli-geforce-rtx-4070-super-polar-fox-m2609-n693
manli-geforce-rtx-4070-super-polar-fox-m2609-n693
Where to buy
    N/A~ £620
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 Manli GeForce RTX 4070 Super Polar Fox M2609 N693

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 61% of models
Score components:

44%

7.6

Performance

24%

6.3

Memory

12%

7.9

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

8.8

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%

7.7

Overall score

30%

7.2

Price

7.6
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
20,995 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 20,995 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 68.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
12,800 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 12,800 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 63.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
29,959 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 29,959 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 70.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.7% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
17,018 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 17,018 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 66.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
35.48 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 35.48 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 65.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.2% 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 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 504 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 54.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 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
20 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 20 Gbps, which is slower than on 50.4% of graphics cards and equal to 7.2% 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
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
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
251x 120x 43 mm
Length
251 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 251 mm long, which is shorter than 67.2% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.4% of graphics cards.
Height
120 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 120 mm tall, which is shorter than 59.3% of graphics cards and equal in height to 5.3% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
?
Show more

Manli GeForce RTX 4070 Super Polar Fox M2609 N693 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
  • 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
  • 46.7% higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (554.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    554.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 57% 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.
    35.48 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
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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%

    8.3

    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
  • 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
  • 46.7% higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (554.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    554.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 57% 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.
    35.48 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
  • 16x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (567.7 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS.
    567.7 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS
  • 32.3% higher PassMark score
    This graphics card has a higher PassMark score than the average graphics card (29,959 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    29,959 points vs 22,638 points
  • 42.1% higher gaming score
    This graphics card has a higher gaming score than the average graphics card (20,995 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    20,995 points vs 14,779 points
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    504 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 31.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (251 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    251 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
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 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
  • 1.2% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,475 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,475 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 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
  • 1.2% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,475 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,475 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 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
  • 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
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 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

9.5
NinTech
≈ estimated
31/03/2024
Hands-on review · gaming, productivity and undervolting tests
Verdict
The Manli GeForce RTX 4070 Super Polar Fox M2609 N693 is a versatile, very efficient card with few drawbacks, especially when undervolted.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Manli GeForce RTX 4070 Super Polar Fox M2609 N693

  • Competitive pricing, often available significantly cheaper than mainstream brands
  • Aesthetic white design appeals to users building color-matched PC setups
  • Triple-fan cooler provides adequate thermal performance for the 220W power draw
  • Strong 1440p gaming performance, roughly matching the RTX 3090 in efficiency and speed
  • Supports modern NVIDIA features including DLSS 3 Frame Generation and AV1 encoding
  • Compact two-slot design makes it manageable for a wide variety of cases

What customers don't like about Manli GeForce RTX 4070 Super Polar Fox M2609 N693

  • Brand perception: Being a less-known brand in Europe and the US can lead to lower resale value
  • Potential for long warranty/RMA support times (up to 45–50 days) if shipped back to Asia
  • 12GB of VRAM may act as a bottleneck for highly demanding 4K textures in the future
  • Requires a 16-pin 12VHPWR power connector or an adapter, which can complicate cable management
  • Narrower 192-bit memory bus compared to higher-tier cards limits performance at ultra-high resolutions

Verdict

The Manli GeForce RTX 4070 Super Polar Fox (M2609+N693) is a powerful Ada Lovelace-based graphics card featuring 7,168 CUDA cores, a base clock of 1,980 MHz, and a boost clock of 2,475 MHz. It is equipped with 12GB of high-speed GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit interface, delivering a substantial 504 GB/s bandwidth and a 220W TDP. Main pros include its exceptional 1440p gaming performance, support for DLSS 3 frame generation, and an efficient twin-fan cooling system with copper heat pipes and a metal backplate. However, its 12GB VRAM may eventually become a bottleneck for the most demanding 4K textures in the future, and its brand presence is less established compared to major competitors.

Compare Manli GeForce RTX 4070 Super Polar Fox M2609 N693 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 Manli GeForce RTX 4070 Super Polar Fox M2609 N693 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found