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

MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£570VRAM:12 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):215 W

MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 3 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio
7.8/10

Overall score

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

40%

7.4

Technical score

25%

8.0

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

▲Better than 62% of graphics cards
7.7

Value for money

Value for money
7.7/ 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 75% of models
Score components

70%

7.8

Overall score

30%

7.5

Price

▲Better than 75%
7.4

Technical score

Technical score
7.4/ 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 58% of models
Score components

44%

6.9

Performance

24%

6.3

Memory

12%

9.0

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

6.0

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

▲Better than 58%
8.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.0/ 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 51% of models

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

7.4

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
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 51%
?

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
  • msi-geforce-rtx-4070-gaming-trio
msi-geforce-rtx-4070-gaming-trio
Where to buy
    N/A~ £570
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 MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio

Based on 0 · 3

Reviewers agree it delivers strong gaming performance with cool, quiet running, and they raise no notable complaints.
Praised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio

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 MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio

Technical score
Technical score
7.4/ 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 58% of models
Score components:

44%

6.9

Performance

24%

6.3

Memory

12%

9.0

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

6.0

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

7.4
Reviews score
8.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.7/ 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 75% of models
Score components:

70%

7.8

Overall score

30%

7.5

Price

7.7
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
18,000 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 18,000 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 60.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
15,446 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 15,446 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 74.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
26,394 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 26,394 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 58.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.8% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
14,665 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 14,665 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 59.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
30.74 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 30.74 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 60.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
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
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)
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
600 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 600 W PSU, which is lower than that of 53.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.6% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
215 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 215 W, which is lower than that of 53.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.7% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
200 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
338x 141x 52 mm
Length
338 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 338 mm long, which is longer than 91.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 1% of graphics cards.
Height
141 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 141 mm tall, which is taller than 85.8% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.9% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2.6 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2.6 slot/s, which is wider than 65.5% of graphics cards and equal in width to 0.3% of graphics cards.
Weight
1,214 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1,214 g, which is heavier than 62% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of Graphics cards.
Show more

MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 4.2% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,610 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,610 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 11.1% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.0/ 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 51% of models

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    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.
    8.0 vs 7.2
  • 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
  • 68.8% higher ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a higher ray tracing score than the average graphics card (15,446 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    15,446 points vs 9,148 points
  • 9x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (36 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    36 MB vs 4 MB
  • 36% higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (30.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    30.74 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 19.2% higher sentiment score
    9.3 vs 7.8
  • 11.1% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.0/ 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 51% of models

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    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.
    8.0 vs 7.2
  • 19.2% higher sentiment score
    9.3 vs 7.8
  • 4.2% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,610 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,610 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 68.8% higher ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a higher ray tracing score than the average graphics card (15,446 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    15,446 points vs 9,148 points
  • 36% higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (30.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    30.74 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 20.5% higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (455.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    455.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 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
  • 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
  • 9x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (36 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    36 MB vs 4 MB
  • 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
  • 9.8 dB quieter under load
    This graphics card has a lower load noise level than the average graphics card (25.6 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    25.6 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 9 °C lower load temperature
    This graphics card has a lower load temperature than the average graphics card (58 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    58 °C vs 67 °C
  • 7.7% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (600 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    600 W vs 650 W
  • 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
  • 55.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (338 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    338 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 16 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (141 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    141 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 55.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (338 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    338 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 16 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (141 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    141 mm vs 125 mm

Video reviews

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

9.0
John Charette
≈ estimated
28/04/2023
Unboxing and review · benchmarks, overclock and game tests
Verdict
The MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio is a good mid-tier value and a strong buy for games that support DLSS 3.
7.0
Gear Seekers
≈ estimated
13/04/2023
Hands-on review · Windows and Linux benchmarks, thermals, pricing
Verdict
The MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio is a decent card at a reasonable value, though its regional pricing is hard to accept.
Not graded
Brand video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

tweaktown.com
13/04/2023
Not graded yet
overclockers.com
13/04/2023
Not graded yet

Third-party reviews

What customers like about MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio

  • Exceptionally quiet operation, often described as 'virtually silent' even under heavy load
  • Superior thermal management with low operating temperatures (typically around 58-60°C)
  • Higher factory overclock compared to the Founders Edition, providing a slight performance edge
  • Excellent power efficiency, delivering RTX 3080-level performance at significantly lower wattage
  • Robust build quality including a sturdy metal backplate and premium cooling system
  • Support for advanced features like DLSS 3 Frame Generation and AV1 encoding

What customers don't like about MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio

  • Large physical dimensions (338mm length) may not fit in smaller or compact PC cases
  • Price premium over the base MSRP of the RTX 4070
  • Limited to 12GB of VRAM, which some users worry may be a bottleneck for future 4K gaming
  • Requires a 16-pin 12VHPWR power connector (though an adapter is included)
  • Large cooler may be considered 'overkill' for the relatively efficient 4070 chip

Verdict

The MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio is a high-performance graphics card built on the NVIDIA Ada Lovelace architecture, featuring 5,888 CUDA cores, 12GB of GDDR6X VRAM on a 192-bit bus, and a 2,610 MHz boost clock. Its primary characteristics include the advanced TRI FROZR 3 thermal system with TORX Fan 5.0 and a nickel-plated copper baseplate for superior heat dissipation. Main pros include exceptional cooling efficiency that maintains low temperatures under load, nearly silent operation, and a factory overclock that delivers approximately 3% better performance than the Founders Edition. However, notable cons include its massive physical footprint at 338mm in length, which may not fit in smaller cases, and the requirement of a 16-pin 12VHPWR power connector instead of a traditional 8-pin PCIe cable.

Compare MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio 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 MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Gaming Trio and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found