GPU choice : GeForce RTX™ 4070 SUPER AERO OC 12G or AORUS GeForce RTX™ 4070 Ti XTREME WATERFORCE , worth the price difference ? (2024)

Hi all ,

As the title says , I want to know your opinions about getting GeForce RTX™ 4070 SUPER AERO OC 12G or AORUS GeForce RTX™ 4070 Ti XTREME WATERFORCE .

Just to be clear , those are the two options that i have at the moment , there isn't any other card available , except a Radeon RX 7900 Gre that I don't consider as an option due to the lack of RT,etc

From where I'm from the 4070 super Aero OC is around $850 and the 4070 ti xtreme water is $ 1020 .

I know the 4070 ti is faster and it has a water cooling system but I'm not sure if its worth the extra price or not for gaming at 1440p. What do you guys think ?

Links :

4070 Super : https://www.gigabyte.com/br/Graphics-Card/GV-N407SAERO-OC-12GD#kf

4070 ti : https://www.gigabyte.com/Graphics-Card/GV-N407TAORUSX-W-12GD#kf

Also if I choose the 4070 ti , for installing the 240m radiator from the GPU I will need to move or remove a couple of fans , as today my case air flow is taking air from the front and bottom and removing it from the cpu cooler at the top and a fan at the back. In that case if I go with the 4070 ti , is considered a good option to install the cooler from the gpu at the bottom or should I remove the one from the front ? Im not sure about that since in that case I will have both cpu and gpu water cooled , not sure if I will need the case fans that much.

Thank you very much in advance!

nguyen said:

I would just go with the 4070 Super Aero OC. There is little benefit going with watercooling these day.

Click to expand...

But the Waterforce is a 4070 Ti. Faster chip.

OP should purchase an air cooled RTX 4070 Ti SUPER instead.

Dr. Dro said:

But the Waterforce is a 4070 Ti. Faster chip.

OP should purchase an air cooled RTX 4070 Ti SUPER instead.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately isnt a option here at my country at the moment.

nguyen said:

I would just go with the 4070 Super Aero OC. There is little benefit going with watercooling these day.

Click to expand...

Isnt just for the water cooler , is more about the extra price for 10 % extra performance worth it or not.

Thank you both for answering!

Air cooled for sure, I'd stay away from an AIO on a gpu unless you swap them often I've owned 3 and all have had issues after 3-4 years with the pump mostly due to not being able mount the radiator in a good spot but who knows maybe they would have degraded either way.

All 3 started out with fantastic temps and slowly degraded to worse than air.

Those were 10 series and 20 series cards maybe things are different now but I doubt it.

Imho it's only worth water cooling a gpu if you have an existing open loop.

Garra said:

Unfortunately isnt a option here at my country at the moment.

Isnt just for the water cooler , is more about the extra price for 10 % extra performance worth it or not.

Thank you both for answering!

Click to expand...

Between these two the 4070 Ti Waterforce is by far the superior option. It's a fully enabled AD104 and that AIO will ensure that it is also one of the coolest and highest performing cards of its kind. If you can afford it, and since the price is only $170 higher, it seems like a no-brainer to me. You don't buy a GPU every day, so that extra $170 might sting a little now but it will well be worth it in the long run.

If I were you, 4070 Ti WF all the way.

@Garra
unless you are using an AIO on the cpu (exhausting hot air outside on top of case), a WC gpu will always be better.
most ppl ignore the fact that chips drop boost clocks with rising temps, for Nv (iirc) its about one step for every 6C increase, so as soon as i have a card boosting to max clock all the time,
instead of being "throttled" makes a big difference.
my 2080S can run at 2.2GHz continuously, while air gets about 1.8-1.9, not sure how ppl can come up with the idea there is no difference in perf.
ignoring for a moment many here have yet to see you post any info of the games you play, nor at what res, so claiming you would have 110 vs 100 fps is a joke,
as it could also be 60 vs 50, making an absolute difference when it comes to "playable".

my card is now a couple years old, i have no problems running all my stuff at 4K (except where i cant scale UI and can properly read (dont get old, lol),
while getting temps between 30-50C and absolute silence (loop), no air card will ever match that, short of external case getting cold air from an AC blown to it.

is a ~100K Corvette or GT-R (almost) as fast as others costing ~300K like a Bentley? sure. do they have the same quality? nope.

cheaper doesnt always mean "better" depending on what the reason for the purchase is, and i rather have a silent gpu that i keep for a few years without trouble, noise and staying cool,
even if it costs a little more.

liquid cooler problems
- they can leak and , when old , liquid will become conductive
- air bubble problem , highest point has to be in the radiator
- compatibility with case
- one more failing point , the pump

you get none of those problems with air cooling
+
if you have a case with 4 vertical expansion slots , ex.: 7(horizontal)+4 , you don't have the GPU sag problem either

Waldorf said:

ignoring for a moment many here have yet to see you post any info of the games you play, nor at what res,

Click to expand...

He said in his opening post 1440p. Usually that means 2560X1440p unless they specify ultra wide.

@Legacy Ivy Terascale
anything will fail, just a matter of time.

and i have yet to see something like a WB fail, unless its leaking, as there is no pump/fan.

yeah, but you get much higher temps, thus losing on boost clocks which means performance.
and sag is connected to weight, not the type cooling.

you act like the pl that say dont buy a +100 K sports car, because it will cost more to own (insurance/maintenance).

just because you dont like it, doesnt mean no one does, or the fact that OP isnt asking about possible problems, but difference in perf.
enthusiast arent about if something will last 100y, so stop treating ppl like they are the avg user, buying a 300$ beige desktop off the shelf of an electronics store.

@64K
yeah, missed that, but still no games mentioned, and there is a big difference.
still, will probably mean any gains will be relevant, and not just add to already proper fps, or that low fps/1% are more relevant..

Waldorf said:

@Garra
unless you are using an AIO on the cpu (exhausting hot air outside on top of case), a WC gpu will always be better.
most ppl ignore the fact that chips drop boost clocks with rising temps, for Nv (iirc) its about one step for every 6C increase, so as soon as i have a card boosting to max clock all the time,
instead of being "throttled" makes a big difference.
my 2080S can run at 2.2GHz continuously, while air gets about 1.8-1.9, not sure how ppl can come up with the idea there is no difference in perf.
ignoring for a moment many here have yet to see you post any info of the games you play, nor at what res, so claiming you would have 110 vs 100 fps is a joke,
as it could also be 60 vs 50, making an absolute difference when it comes to "playable".

my card is now a couple years old, i have no problems running all my stuff at 4K (except where i cant scale UI and can properly read (dont get old, lol),
while getting temps between 30-50C and absolute silence (loop), no air card will ever match that, short of external case getting cold air from an AC blown to it.

is a ~100K Corvette or GT-R (almost) as fast as others costing ~300K like a Bentley? sure. do they have the same quality? nope.

cheaper doesnt always mean "better" depending on what the reason for the purchase is, and i rather have a silent gpu that i keep for a few years without trouble, noise and staying cool,
even if it costs a little more.

Click to expand...

I agree with you in this case , I know the water cooled option will be a greater option performance and temps wise , and probably will last longer than the 4070 super because of the higher quality.

I mostly play games like The witcher 3 , RE4,hogwart legacy,god of war and games like that at 2k. In fact I build a pc just for a future game release , Stalker 2 , which is going to use Unreal Engine 5.

The only cons that I have at the moment for the rtx 4070 ti is my case space , I have only two options , or either remove the front or bottom fans , both front and bottom put air into the case while at the top I have my cpu water cooler sending air out , the same for the back fan. Im not sure if removing front or bottom fans will cause higher temps at other components , my cpu is water cooled by a Corsair h150i 360mm.

Thank you all for your answers , I will take each as consideration for my decision!

@Garra
will it go up? sure. will it matter? nope. you already have "better" than simple cooling, so it wont matter in actual use.
if given the choice, i would mount it to the front as exhaust, have bottom (cooler) and rear blow in fresh air.

but maybe see if this one is available.
4070ti WB

you can find no-name sets that have pump/res/connectors sometimes even incl rad, you would only need some tubing and coolant.
should still be less than the difference, and a 120/140 rad would fit to the rear, worst case would give you the option to runn linger tubing to mount rad to the front.

besides that,. many ignore one major thing:
all mfg pre-select on chips, with the most capable always going into the WC units, and even on those, the WB has the "best" perf one,
so if you need some extra fps down the road, its easy to use Afterburner to scan for oc, add "500 MHz" to vram clock (dont quote me, look at reviews what is common).

Waldorf said:

res alone doesnt mean much, i can play games from 1995 in 4k on anything that has 4gb vram..

Click to expand...

Right, because he's buying new material to play games from 1995.... Come on man, use your head.

Waldorf said:

@Garra
will it go up? sure. will it matter? nope. you already have "better" than simple cooling, so it wont matter in actual use.
if given the choice, i would mount it to the front as exhaust, have bottom (cooler) and rear blow in fresh air.

but maybe see if this one is available.
4070ti WB

you can find no-name sets that have pump/res/connectors sometimes even incl rad, you would only need some tubing and coolant.
should still be less than the difference, and a 120/140 rad would fit to the rear, worst case would give you the option to runn linger tubing to mount rad to the front.

besides that,. many ignore one major thing:
all mfg pre-select on chips, with the most capable always going into the WC units, and even on those, the WB has the "best" perf one,
so if you need some extra fps down the road, its easy to use Afterburner to scan for oc, add "500 MHz" to vram clock (dont quote me, look at reviews what is common).

Click to expand...

The option available is the one that have already the radiator and fans included, either way I wouldn't create a custom loop myself . Im not that skillful to do that.

I guess I will go with the 4070 ti to be a little more future proof.

Thank you all for your answers and suggestions!

nguyen said:

I would just go with the 4070 Super Aero OC. There is little benefit going with watercooling these day.

Click to expand...

silence is the only benefit going watercooling…
but a 4080 is better than a watercooled 4070. (same price i guess) but the watercooled 4070 is “silent”

(not much overclocking, because power is the limitation, not temps. (IMO))

@Dahita
i did.
thats why i dont recommend something just based on res like you did, as there appl getting here because of a web search,
and seeing the initial post didnt have any game info, might miss that.

ignoring that ppl cant upgrade their hw, just because they dont play any"new" games (as in that they didnt play it before)? right.

@redeye
except all boosting nowadays is limited by temp, so say 50C vs 74C (or more on air), is already a difference of at least 5-6 steps.
if my 2080S was aircooled, i would get maybe 1.9 GHz for boost clock, while on water its 2.2.
and ~300 MHz WILL make a diff, given the same chip.

and since WC cards are getting beefed up hw, i have yet to see my card doing more than 130%, while max is 140%...

Waldorf said:

@Dahita
i did.
thats why i dont recommend something just based on res like you did, as there appl getting here because of a web search,
and seeing the initial post didnt have any game info, might miss that.

ignoring that ppl cant upgrade their hw, just because they dont play any"new" games (as in that they didnt play it before)? right.

@redeye
except all boosting nowadays is limited by temp, so say 50C vs 74C (or more on air), is already a difference of at least 5-6 steps.
if my 2080S was aircooled, i would get maybe 1.9 GHz for boost clock, while on water its 2.2.
and ~300 MHz WILL make a diff, given the same chip.

and since WC cards are getting beefed up hw, i have yet to see my card doing more than 130%, while max is 140%...

Click to expand...

People do not hesitate to buy a 4070 SUPER or a 4070 Ti to play games from 1995. So yeah, resolution is important, which is why you have every resolution tested in every video card reviews. You're arguing for the sake of arguing.

Dahita said:

People do not hesitate to buy a 4070 SUPER or a 4070 Ti to play games from 1995. So yeah, resolution is important, which is why you have every resolution tested in every video card reviews. You're arguing for the sake of arguing.

Click to expand...

Resolution isn't always so important, because its a moving target. In the end, you're buying a card with X performance and games require Y performance. Its not related to resolution, way too many variables.

Personally the ONLY REASON I would consider the res people play at is in relation to VRAM and life expectancy of the card. You don't generally buy a 12GB GPU to play at 4K, if you have the option to get a bit more. That's just about the only 'choice' that I would have resolution play a role in, also in this specific topic. On the other hand, 12GB isn't a game breaker either, if you intend to keep the card for say, 2 years and aren't averse to tweaking settings to stay within that limit.

1995 is a stretch tho lol

Since the target is 1440p, I don't really see how the 4070ti (S or no) is a no brainer. I'm on UW (3440x1440) with a 7900XT and I have so much performance on tap, its stupid; and the 4070ti is close to that. Get the best deal at lowest cost instead and upgrade faster, might be a better path at this point. With any 12GB card that is your most likely route anyway, because we're already touching on that in some games.

Really? It's a wonder why techpowerup makes reviews.

"This puts the RTX 4070 Ti in an interesting position. RTX 4070 Ti is an amazing choice for gaming at 1440p, at maxed out details"

The 4070 Ti was designed for 1440p. I don't know that there's much else to argue about.