GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER vs GT 230M

Place in the ranking	1211	7
Place by popularity	not in top-100	65
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	48.52
Power efficiency	1.66	19.94
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GT216	AD103
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	15 June 2009 (15 years ago)	8 January 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	48	8448
Core clock speed	500 MHz	2340 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2610 MHz
Number of transistors	486 million	45,900 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	285 Watt
Texture fill rate	8.000	689.0
Floating-point processing power	0.1056 TFLOPS	44.1 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	158	no data
ROPs	8	96
TMUs	16	264
Tensor Cores	no data	264
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	66

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	310 mm
Width	no data	3-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 16-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR3	GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount	Up to 1 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 600 (DDR2), Up to 800 (GDDR3), Up to 1066 (GDDR3) MHz	1313 MHz
Memory bandwidth	16 (DDR2), 25 (DDR3)	672.3 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	Dual Link DVIVGADisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVI	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	HDA	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management

8.0

no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.1	6.7
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	+	8.9

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GT 230M 0.55

RTX 4070 Ti SUPER 82.07
+14822%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GT 230M 212

RTX 4070 Ti SUPER 31669
+14838%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	1−2 −23100%	232 +23100%
1440p	1−2 −16000%	161 +16000%
4K	0−1	88

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	3.44
1440p	no data	4.96
4K	no data	9.08

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−13233%

400−450
+13233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −4100%	160−170 +4100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −3900%	120−130 +3900%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −13233%	400−450 +13233%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −20000%	200−210 +20000%
Hitman 3	5−6 −2480%	120−130 +2480%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −2545%	290−300 +2545%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −5900%	350−400 +5900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −413%	150−160 +413%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −4100%	160−170 +4100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −3900%	120−130 +3900%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −13233%	400−450 +13233%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −20000%	200−210 +20000%
Hitman 3	5−6 −2480%	120−130 +2480%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −2545%	290−300 +2545%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −7267%	442 +7267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −1730%	180−190 +1730%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −413%	150−160 +413%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −4100%	160−170 +4100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −3900%	120−130 +3900%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −13233%	400−450 +13233%
Hitman 3	5−6 −2480%	120−130 +2480%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −2545%	290−300 +2545%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −6683%	407 +6683%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −2000%	210 +2000%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −380%	144 +380%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−11100%

110−120
+11100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	95−100
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −13900%	140−150 +13900%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −8300%	80−85 +8300%
Hitman 3	6−7 −1900%	120−130 +1900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −7300%	220−230 +7300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −23900%	240−250 +23900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−4100%

120−130
+4100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −7100%	70−75 +7100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	65−70

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−4850%

95−100
+4850%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Battlefield 5	240−250 +0%	240−250 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260 +0%	250−260 +0%
Metro Exodus	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Battlefield 5	240−250 +0%	240−250 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260 +0%	250−260 +0%
Metro Exodus	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260 +0%	250−260 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

120−130

+0%

120−130

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5

160−170

+0%

160−170

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Metro Exodus	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	306 +0%	306 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	159 +0%	159 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Hitman 3	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	162 +0%	162 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	69 +0%	69 +0%

This is how GT 230M and RTX 4070 Ti SUPER compete in popular games:

RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is 23100% faster in 1080p
RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is 16000% faster in 1440p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is 23900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is ahead in 30 tests (47%)
there's a draw in 34 tests (53%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.55	82.07
Recency	15 June 2009	8 January 2024
Chip lithography	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	285 Watt

GT 230M has 1139.1% lower power consumption.

RTX 4070 Ti SUPER, on the other hand, has a 14821.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 230M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 230M is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.