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

ZOTAC GeForce RTX 4070 X Gaming OC review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£570VRAM:12 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):200 W

ZOTAC GeForce RTX 4070 X Gaming OC Review: Compare 117 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

ZOTAC GeForce RTX 4070 X Gaming OC
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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 59% of models
Score components

40%

7.4

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%

9.3

Sentiment score

â–²Better than 59% 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 62% of models
Score components

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

7.5

Price

â–²Better than 62%
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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 59% of models
Score components

44%

6.8

Performance

24%

6.2

Memory

12%

9.1

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

8.2

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

â–²Better than 59%
?

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
â–¼
<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
  • zotac-geforce-rtx-4070-x-gaming-oc-opal-white
zotac-geforce-rtx-4070-x-gaming-oc-opal-white
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 owners say about the ZOTAC GeForce RTX 4070 X Gaming 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 ZOTAC GeForce RTX 4070 X Gaming OC

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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 59% of models
Score components:

44%

6.8

Performance

24%

6.2

Memory

12%

9.1

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

8.2

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

7.4
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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 62% of models
Score components:

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

7.5

Price

7.6
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
18,150 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 18,150 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 61.3% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
9,248 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 9,248 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 51.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
31,998 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 31,998 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 78.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
14,609 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 14,609 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 57.6% of graphics cards and equal to 1% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
29.68 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 29.68 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 59.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% 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)
200 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 200 W, which is lower than that of 50.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 3.7% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
200 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 200 W under peak load, which is lower than 53.4% of graphics cards and equal to 3.6% 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
200 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 200 W, which is lower than that of 55.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.6% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
200 W
Show more
Size
303x 121x 61 mm
Length
303 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 303 mm long, which is longer than 61.6% of graphics cards and equal in length to 1.2% of graphics cards.
Height
121 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 121 mm tall, which is shorter than 56.5% of graphics cards and equal in height to 1.8% 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

ZOTAC GeForce RTX 4070 X Gaming OC vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 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
  • 41.3% higher PassMark score
    This graphics card has a higher PassMark score than the average graphics card (31,998 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    31,998 points vs 22,638 points
  • 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
  • 19.2% higher sentiment score
    9.3 vs 7.8
  • 31.3% higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (29.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    29.68 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 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
  • 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
  • 19.2% higher sentiment score
    9.3 vs 7.8
  • 41.3% higher PassMark score
    This graphics card has a higher PassMark score than the average graphics card (31,998 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    31,998 points vs 22,638 points
  • 31.3% higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (29.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    29.68 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 20.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (303 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    303 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 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
  • 6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (41.4 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    41.4 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 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 FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (3 vs 3.1).
    3 vs 3.1
  • 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
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (3 vs 3.1).
    3 vs 3.1
  • 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
  • 6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (41.4 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    41.4 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 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
  • 20.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (303 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    303 mm vs 282.2 mm

Video reviews

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

Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about ZOTAC GeForce RTX 4070 X Gaming OC

  • Excellent 1440p performance with DLSS 3 support for significantly improved frame rates
  • Striking 'Opal White' design with unique iridescent finish and RGB lighting
  • High power efficiency, often matching 3080-level performance at much lower wattage
  • Compact form factor compared to other triple-fan models, fitting easier in many cases
  • Quiet operation during light to moderate gaming sessions

What customers don't like about ZOTAC GeForce RTX 4070 X Gaming OC

  • Fans can become noticeably loud when the card is under heavy load
  • Build materials (plastic shroud) feel less premium compared to high-end competitors like MSI or Asus
  • Higher price point than base MSRP RTX 4070 models
  • Limited overclocking headroom due to the standard power limit
  • Side RGB logo design is polarizing among some users

Verdict

The Zotac Gaming GeForce RTX 4070 X-Gaming OC Opal White is a mid-range graphics card built on the NVIDIA Ada Lovelace architecture, featuring 5,888 CUDA cores and a factory-overclocked boost speed of 2,520 MHz. It is equipped with 12GB of high-speed GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth and supporting advanced features like DLSS 3.5, ray tracing, and 4K resolution output via HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 1.4a connectors. Its main advantages include a striking white aesthetic with Spectra RGB lighting, high power efficiency with a 200W TDP, and impressive 1440p gaming performance that rivals the previous-generation flagship RTX 3080. However, potential drawbacks include its relatively high price-to-performance ratio compared to newer 'Super' models and its bulky triple-slot design, which measures 303mm in length and may not fit in smaller PC cases.

Compare ZOTAC GeForce RTX 4070 X Gaming 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 ZOTAC GeForce RTX 4070 X Gaming OC and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found