GeForce RTX 5070 vs UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) with GeForce RTX 5070, including specs and performance data.
RTX 5070 outperforms UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) by a whopping 3843% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 903 | 11 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 13.74 | no data |
| Architecture | Gen. 11 (2021) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | Gen. 11 | GB205 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 11 January 2021 (4 years ago) | February 2025 (recently) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $549 |
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 | 32 | 6144 |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | 2165 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 900 MHz | 2510 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 31,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 10 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 4.8 - 10 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 481.9 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 30.84 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 64 |
| TMUs | no data | 192 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 192 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 48 |
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).
| Interface | no data | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | 2-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 | no data | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 672.0 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 | no data | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1a |
| HDMI | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.4 |
| CUDA | - | 10.1 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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 | 8
−3650%
| 300−350
+3650%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 1.83 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−3700%
|
190−200
+3700%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1
−3400%
|
35−40
+3400%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−3650%
|
300−310
+3650%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−3650%
|
75−80
+3650%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+83.3%
|
6−7
−83.3%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+58.3%
|
24−27
−58.3%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−3700%
|
190−200
+3700%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
+388%
|
8−9
−388%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Dota 2 | 12
−3650%
|
450−500
+3650%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1
−3400%
|
35−40
+3400%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−3650%
|
300−310
+3650%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−3650%
|
75−80
+3650%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2
−3650%
|
75−80
+3650%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−3567%
|
110−120
+3567%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+83.3%
|
6−7
−83.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+58.3%
|
24−27
−58.3%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−3700%
|
190−200
+3700%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Dota 2 | 11
−3536%
|
400−450
+3536%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1
−3400%
|
35−40
+3400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−3650%
|
75−80
+3650%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+83.3%
|
6−7
−83.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+58.3%
|
24−27
−58.3%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 8−9
−3650%
|
300−310
+3650%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−3746%
|
500−550
+3746%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−3746%
|
500−550
+3746%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
−3829%
|
550−600
+3829%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−3650%
|
75−80
+3650%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−3400%
|
35−40
+3400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−3567%
|
110−120
+3567%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−3400%
|
35−40
+3400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−3567%
|
110−120
+3567%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
−3400%
|
35−40
+3400%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 4−5
−3650%
|
150−160
+3650%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
This is how UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) and RTX 5070 compete in popular games:
- RTX 5070 is 3650% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is 900% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is ahead in 27 tests (93%)
- there's a draw in 2 tests (7%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.98 | 78.07 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 4 Watt | 250 Watt |
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) has 6150% lower power consumption.
RTX 5070, on the other hand, has a 3842.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 5070 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) in performance tests.
Be aware that UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 5070 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
