Assembling a PC from scratch is a familiar task for many tech enthusiasts, but the concept of building your own PC case might be novel to some. The Cooler Master Qube 500 Flatpack, a new entrant in the compact PC case market, brings a unique DIY aspect to PC building.
Following in the footsteps of the In Win Airforce, the Qube 500 aims to elevate the build-your-own-case concept with an appealing design, versatility, and value, while offering easy to follow instructions via Cooler Master's YouTube channel. No matter where you are in your PC building journey, if you've got a motherboard and one of the best graphics cards that will fit in this one, you should definitely give it a look as it earns an unqualified place on our best PC case list.
The Qube 500 arrives flatpacked, which is going to be easily recognizable for anyone who's put together an Ikea table. The review unit I assembled, the Macaron edition, is a sleek and modern white base with different colored panels to further personalize your build. But, the case is also available in a pure white or pure black versions.
The design integrates removable faces with dust covers and a handy top-mounted handle on either side, making carrying the case a breeze. The front I/O includes a USB Type-C port, two USB Type-A ports, a power button with an LED indicator, and a headphone/microphone combo jack, so you'll get all the basics covered with this case.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The back panel hosts a power plug, seven-slot expansion-card bracket suitable for vertical graphics card mounting, with a maximum length of 365mm for a GPU.
There is also a pre-installed 120mm exhaust fan, and while Cooler Master says that fitting a 140mm fan is possible, I honestly don't see (and unfortunately, I didn't have a 140mm fan handy to test that claim with). The rest of the case supports up to two 140mm fans on each of the top, bottom, front, and side panels, offering considerable cooling options, especially since the sides themselves are reasonably open, allowing for considerable airflow throughout.
The Qube 500's interior is very well designed, accommodating a 3.5-inch drive on vibration-damping grommets and an additional mounts for both 3.5-inch and 2.5-inch drives. The layout ensures very efficient space utilization, ideal for a compact case, and assembling the PC section-by-section via the YouTube tutorial helps ensure that you're able to squeeze everything you can into the case.
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The Qube 500's assembly is straightforward, thanks to the included installation guide, cable ties, case feet, screws, standoffs, and drive mounting pins, though I can't stress enough that you follow along with the YouTube assembly guide (as well as the advanced assembly guide). The interior layout is designed for ease of component installation, supporting both full-size ATX12V power supplies. The case's compactness is noteworthy, though it poses some limitations for front fan placement and long graphics cards when using a full-ATX power supply upfront.
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The Cooler Master Qube 500 stands out for its build-it-yourself appeal and the satisfaction of creating not just the PC but its housing. This is honestly the ideal project to work with a younger sibling or cousin to help build their first PC, and it also appeals to experienced builders with its budget-friendly price and the novelty of the assembly process. While the building aspect might seem superfluous to some, the case's design, configurability, and price point make this one of the more compelling PC cases on the market despite its apparent simplicity.
The Qube 500 is a testament to Cooler Master's innovative approach to PC case design, offering a unique and enjoyable building experience without compromising on functionality and performance. Whether you're a DIY enthusiast or looking for a budget-friendly, compact case with good performance, the Qube 500 is an excellent choice that brings a new dimension to custom PC building.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Cooler Master Qube 500: Price & availability
How much does it cost? $99.99 (about £80 / AU$140)
When is it available? Available now
Where can you get it? Available in the US, UK, and Australia
The Cooler Master Qube 500 Flatpack comes in three color options, white or black (with an MSRP of $79.99, or £89.99 in the UK and AU$145 in Australia), or the multi-color Macaron kit (with an MSRP of $99.99, or £104.99 in the UK and AU$167.50 in Australia).
This doesn't make it the cheapest PC case around, but it's definitely not the most expensive either, and considering that there really aren't a whole lot of cases like it, this one is well worth the extra investment despite it lacking fancy features like touchscreens or wraparound glass enclosures.
Cooler Master Qube 500: Specs
Should you buy the Cooler Master Qube 500 Flatpack?
Buy the Cooler Master Qube 500 Flatpack if...
You want a great DIY PC build project
Whether for yourself or helping someone get into PC building, this case is fun to assemble and looks fantastic, especially with the Macaron colors.
You want great ventilation
The amount of airflow in this case is fantastic thanks to the fairly open sides.
Don't buy it if...
You need a massive case If you've got a load of 140mm PC fans with huge radiators or massive CPU tower coolers, this case will likely be too small for you.
You want that ol' time PC gamer aesthetic
If you're looking for the RGB and stealth bomber aesthetic of a typical gaming PC, you might be able to get away with that with the all-black case, but otherwise, this is way too pastel for any kind of "battlestation" aesthetic.
We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.
Assembling a PC from scratch is a familiar task for many tech enthusiasts, but the concept of building your own PC case might be novel to some. The PowerColor Qube 500 Flatpack, a new entrant in the compact PC case market, brings a unique DIY aspect to PC building.
Following in the footsteps of the In Win Airforce, the Qube 500 aims to elevate the build-your-own-case concept with an appealing design, versatility, and value, while offering easy to follow instructions via PowerColor's YouTube channel. No matter where you are in your PC building journey, if you've got a motherboard and one of the best graphics cards that will fit in this one, you should definitely give it a look as it earns an unqualified place on our best PC case list.
The Qube 500 arrives flatpacked, which is going to be easily recognizable for anyone who's put together an Ikea table. The review unit I assembled, the Macaron edition, is a sleek and modern white base with different colored panels to further personalize your build. But, the case is also available in a pure white or pure black versions.
The design integrates removable faces with dust covers and a handy top-mounted handle on either side, making carrying the case a breeze. The front I/O includes a USB Type-C port, two USB Type-A ports, a power button with an LED indicator, and a headphone/microphone combo jack, so you'll get all the basics covered with this case.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The back panel hosts a power plug, seven-slot expansion-card bracket suitable for vertical graphics card mounting, with a maximum length of 365mm for a GPU.
There is also a pre-installed 120mm exhaust fan, and while PowerColor says that fitting a 140mm fan is possible, I honestly don't see (and unfortunately, I didn't have a 140mm fan handy to test that claim with). The rest of the case supports up to two 140mm fans on each of the top, bottom, front, and side panels, offering considerable cooling options, especially since the sides themselves are reasonably open, allowing for considerable airflow throughout.
The Qube 500's interior is very well designed, accommodating a 3.5-inch drive on vibration-damping grommets and an additional mounts for both 3.5-inch and 2.5-inch drives. The layout ensures very efficient space utilization, ideal for a compact case, and assembling the PC section-by-section via the YouTube tutorial helps ensure that you're able to squeeze everything you can into the case.
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The Qube 500's assembly is straightforward, thanks to the included installation guide, cable ties, case feet, screws, standoffs, and drive mounting pins, though I can't stress enough that you follow along with the YouTube assembly guide (as well as the advanced assembly guide). The interior layout is designed for ease of component installation, supporting both full-size ATX12V power supplies. The case's compactness is noteworthy, though it poses some limitations for front fan placement and long graphics cards when using a full-ATX power supply upfront.
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The PowerColor Qube 500 stands out for its build-it-yourself appeal and the satisfaction of creating not just the PC but its housing. This is honestly the ideal project to work with a younger sibling or cousin to help build their first PC, and it also appeals to experienced builders with its budget-friendly price and the novelty of the assembly process. While the building aspect might seem superfluous to some, the case's design, configurability, and price point make this one of the more compelling PC cases on the market despite its apparent simplicity.
The Qube 500 is a testament to PowerColor's innovative approach to PC case design, offering a unique and enjoyable building experience without compromising on functionality and performance. Whether you're a DIY enthusiast or looking for a budget-friendly, compact case with good performance, the Qube 500 is an excellent choice that brings a new dimension to custom PC building.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
PowerColor Qube 500: Price & availability
How much does it cost? $99.99 (about £80 / AU$140)
When is it available? Available now
Where can you get it? Available in the US, UK, and Australia
The PowerColor Qube 500 Flatpack comes in three color options, white or black (with an MSRP of $79.99, or £89.99 in the UK and AU$145 in Australia), or the multi-color Macaron kit (with an MSRP of $99.99, or £104.99 in the UK and AU$167.50 in Australia).
This doesn't make it the cheapest PC case around, but it's definitely not the most expensive either, and considering that there really aren't a whole lot of cases like it, this one is well worth the extra investment despite it lacking fancy features like touchscreens or wraparound glass enclosures.
PowerColor Qube 500: Specs
Should you buy the PowerColor Qube 500 Flatpack?
Buy the PowerColor Qube 500 Flatpack if...
You want a great DIY PC build project
Whether for yourself or helping someone get into PC building, this case is fun to assemble and looks fantastic, especially with the Macaron colors.
You want great ventilation
The amount of airflow in this case is fantastic thanks to the fairly open sides.
Don't buy it if...
You need a massive case If you've got a load of 140mm PC fans with huge radiators or massive CPU tower coolers, this case will likely be too small for you.
You want that ol' time PC gamer aesthetic
If you're looking for the RGB and stealth bomber aesthetic of a typical gaming PC, you might be able to get away with that with the all-black case, but otherwise, this is way too pastel for any kind of "battlestation" aesthetic.
We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.
PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC: Two-minute review
The PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC is another solid entry into the Nvidia Lovelace family from PNY, and gamers or creators (or both) looking for a little extra performance for their money will very pleased if they bought this card.
With a US MSRP of $599.99 (about £480/AU$840), this card sells for the same as the Founders Edition in my Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super review, but it comes with a few nifty extras that make an already excellent graphics card even better.
In the main, this comes from the slightly faster factory boost clock of 2,490 MHz, up from the Founders Edition's 2,475 MHz boost. To be clear, this is only 0.60% faster, so the actual performance in real terms is a couple of points here, a frame or two there, and isn't the kind of thing that you're going to really notice even if you have the benefit of having both cards to test side-by-side like I do (if you want to see raw performance numbers vis-a-vis the competition, check out the Founders Edition review and tack on about 0.5% to the RTX 4070 Super's scores, more or less).
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
That said, extra performance is extra performance, however small, and with the PNY RTX 4070 Super Verto OC, you get a little bump in performance right out of the box. After that, you also have the PNY VelocityX overclocking software, where you can take things a good bit further, especially thanks to the 12VHPWR cable allowing for some extra wattage into the GPU.
That said, anytime you're overclocking any computer hardware yourself, either through a software tool or otherwise, do be careful not to push things too far and potentially damage your card. At $600, this is still a good investment.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
In terms of design, the dual-fan shroud for the PNY Verto series is the same as it is on other cards, but that's not terrible. It's not the flashiest design, but the dual fan design and exposed heatsink does allow for better cooling that is noticeable in my testing, which shows the PNY card running a few degrees cooler than the Founders Edition running the same 3DMark Speedway stress tests.
If there's one thing that I'm sad about its that with the 4070 Super, the 220W TGP means that you need to have either two 8-pin connectors or a 16-pin connector, so unlike the card in my PNY GeForce RTX 4070 XLR8 review that was able to sport a single 8-pin power connector, you're stuck with a 16-pin here.
There is an adapter in the box to let you plug two 8-pin cables into the card, but any time an adapter is involved, you're going to have to deal with some cable management issues.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Beyond that, the PNY RTX 4070 Super Verto OC is a little bit longer and taller than the Founders Edition (9.74 inches vs 9.4 inches and 4.74 inches vs 4.3 inches), though they both take up about the same amount of slot space as a dual slot card.
The PNY card's extra length does give it a bit more heat sink to work with though, and the heatsink and fan overhang the PCB allowing for direct air passthrough for better cooling performance. Essentially, you'll be able to slot this card into just about any of the best PC cases that aren't special "mini" chasses without an issue and get some extra cooling performance in the process.
Wrapping up, the PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC is a solid choice for anyone looking to pick up an RTX 4070 Super thanks to some solid extras for the same price as MSRP. You won't get a whole lot of bling with it, but if what you're looking for is the best 1440p graphics card to play the best PC games or do some 3D modeling on the side, this card will get you the performance you need to make it happen.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC: Price & availability
How much is it? US MSRP $599 (about £480, AU$840)
When is it out? January 17, 2024
Where can you get it? You can buy it in the US, UK, and Australia
The PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC goes on sale on January 17, 2024, with a US MSRP of $599.99 (about £480, AU$840), and will be available in the US, UK, and Australia at launch or soon thereafter.
This puts it at the same MSRP as the Founders Edition card, which means you get some extra performance thrown in essentially for free, and the VelocityX overclocking software lets you tinker a bit with the card to squeeze out the best possible performance from this GPU.
In terms of other third-party GPUs, you're likely to find better cooling, flashier designs, and possibly better performance via OC settings, but for the price, the PNY RTX 4070 Super Verto OC is a great value for this GPU, even if it's pricier than the competing AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT.
PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC: Specs
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Should you buy the PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC?
Buy the PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC if...
You want an overclocked card for a great price
At MSRP, this card gives you both faster factory clocks as well as the ability to easily tweak your card's performance.
You want great cooling
The design of the RTX 4070 Super Verto OC lets air blow through part of the heatsink unobstructed, providing better cooling than the Nvidia Founders Edition.
Don't buy it if...
You want something flashy
The PNY Verto series isn't big on RGB, so if you want something shiny, this card isn't for you.
You're on a tight budget
Despite its extras, the PNY RTX 4070 Super Verto OC is still an expensive card, so you might want to check out the RX 7800 XT for great gaming performance at a better price.
PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC: Also consider
If my PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC review has you looking for other options, here are two more graphics cards to consider...
How I tested the PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC
I spent about two days testing the PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC
I tested its gaming performance and content creation performance specifically
I used out standard battery of benchmark tests
Having tested the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super already, I looked into how much the PNY GeForce RTX 4070 Super Verto OC exceeded that baseline performance, and where it fell short, if applicable. I did this using a more precise series of benchmark tests that pushed the card's thermals to the limit, as well as repeatable synthetic benchmarks to determine comparable scores.
I also tinkered with PNY's VelocityX overclocking software to see how well that software affected the card's performance for better or worse.
I've been a hardware reviewer for many years now and I've spent more time at TechRadar's PC component test bench than I'd like to admit, so I know my way around graphics cards and what they ought to be capable of given their specs and pricepoints; knowledge that I leverage to its fullest to make sure that our customers get the best possible product for their money.
First reviewed January 2024
We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.
• Original review date: January 2024 • Launch price: MSRP at $599 / £579 / AU$1,119 • Lowest price now: $979.23 / £582.34 / AU$999
Update – April 2025: The RTX 4070 Super was the best graphics card for 1440p and light 4K gaming on the market last year, and with the release of the RTX 5070 this year, you'd hope that prices would come down, but inexplicably, that isn't the case.
It would be one thing if the RTX 5070 was totally out of stock online and was a substantially worse card than the RTX 4070 Super, but that isn't the case. The RTX 5070 might have been disappointing, but it is still a better GPU than the RTX 4070 Super, even if by the barest of margins.
You can find the RTX 5070 online for at or slightly above MSRP pretty easily (the lowest price I've found is this MSI RTX 5070 Shadow OC card at Walmart for $669.99), so going out of your way to buy the RTX 4070 Super at a massive premium doesn't make any sense.
Original unedited review follows...
Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super: Two minute review
The Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super is a graphics card with a lot of expectations built up around it after it's announcement at CES 2024, and if you've yet to upgrade your graphics card in a minute and you've been waiting for a sign, this release is what you've been waiting for, whether you end up buying it or going with a competing card from AMD or Intel.
Looking across the lineup of Nvidia graphics cards in 2023, the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 definitely reviewed as one of Team Green's best thanks to fantastic performance and a more accessible price compared to the rest of the GPU market at the time. At $599.99 in the US (about £480/AU$840), the RTX 4070 Super is going to retail (at MSRP) for the same launch price as the card it refreshes, while the RTX 4070 will see a healthy price cut when the RTX 4070 Super goes on sale on January 17, 2024.
In terms of what you're getting for that same amount of money, you're going to get substantially more SMs for more processing power as well as a slightly faster base clock speed. But, sadly, we're still stuck with just 12GB GDDR6X VRAM which does hamper this card's 4K potential. If you're looking for the best 4K graphics card, you may have to wait to see what the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super or Nvidia GeForce RTX 4080 Super have to offer later in January.
If what you're looking for is the best 1440p graphics card on the market, well, in terms of sheer performance, look no further. Between upgraded specs and DLSS 3 with Frame Generation, Nvidia Reflex, and a host of other tech packed into this card, you'll be playing the best PC games at high settings with the best 1440p monitors for many years to come.
Still, it's not an unqualified win for Nvidia here. For one, the price of the Nvidia RTX 4070 Super is still $100 (about £80/AU$140) more than the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT that it's directly competing with. And while the RTX 4070 Super does outperform the best AMD graphics card for the midrange on a number of levels, gaming sadly isn't one of them, unless you lean heavily on ray tracing.
Even in places where you factor in DLSS, without frame generation, Nvidia lags behind the RX 7800 XT overall when it comes to gaming. And once AMD releases its own frame generation tech for FSR in the coming weeks, the advantage Nvidia gets from DLSS 3 with Frame Generation will likewise tighten up. On this point, gamers are going to have some harder questions to ask themselves than anyone else, and the price of the RX 7800 XT alone might be more than enough to tip the scales for them.
Still, it's hard to argue that Nvidia hasn't delivered an absolutely phenomenal card with the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super, and for midrange users out there who want fantastic gaming as well as content creation features and raw performance, this is almost certainly going to be at the top of the list when making your choice about a new upgrade.
How much is it? US MSRP $599.99 (about £480, AU$840)
When is it out? January 17, 2024
Where can you get it? You can buy it in the US, UK, and Australia
The Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super goes on sale on January 17, 2024, for $599.99 in the US (about £480/AU$840), which is the same price as the launch MSRP of the RTX 4070 when it launched in April of 2023.
And while we love to see prices stay more accessible for gamers and creators, Nvidia is still charging a premium for its card vis-à-vis AMD's competing RX 7800 XT, which has competitive performance for about $100 less.
Still, despite not being the best cheap graphics card on the market, for what you're getting, the price on the RTX 4070 Super is a very good value overall. While not quite AMD levels of performance for price, this is about as good a value as you're going to get from an Nvidia GPU on the market today (at least until we see what the RTX 4070 Ti Super and RTX 4080 Super are working with later this month).
Value score: 4/5
Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super: Design
Gorgeous all-black finish
Same size as base RTX 4070
Still requires 16-pin power
The Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super Founders Edition is easily one of the sexiest graphics cards I've laid hands on in a long while. The all-black shroud, fans, and trim give it a very sleek look that might not have any of the flash of RGB bedazzled third-party cards, but as far as Nvidia's lineup goes, this is easily the most attractive.
In every other way, barring the Super branding, this card is identical to the original RTX 4070, so it comes with all its positives and negatives as well. Its smaller than its larger siblings, so its much more manageable in a wider variety of cases, but it is still heavy enough that some kind of GPU support is going to be needed if you don't have a vertical card adapter for your case.
The cooling solution is also fairly good and has plenty of power for cooling. Its 16-pin connector means that if you don't have an ATX 3.0 power supply, you'll need to use a two-8-pin-to-one-16-pin adapter, which might make cable management a bit of a hassle.
Design score: 4.5/5
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super: Features & specs
21% higher SM count
Slightly faster base clock
STILL just 12GB VRAM
When it comes to the RTX 4070 Super, there is a lot to appreciate here. For the same price as the RTX 4070, you're getting a far more SMs (56 to the RTX 4070's 46, a 21% increase), so that also means that you're getting a hefty upgrade in terms of CUDA cores (7,168 to 5,888), ray tracing cores (56 to 46), and tensor cores (224 to 184) over the original RTX 4070.
You're also getting a slightly higher base clock rate of 1,980MHz , which is about 3% faster than the base RTX 4070. For that, the RTX 4070 Super also has a 220W TGP, which unfortunately means that you're not going to get any RTX 4070 Super cards with an 8-pin connector like you can with the RTX 4070.
Beyond that, there isn't too much different spec-wise with the RTX 4070 Super than you have with the RTX 4070, and this unfortunately includes the 12GB GDDR6X VRAM configuration. Mind you, this is plenty for 1440p gaming, but if you've got one of the best 4K monitors, you'll have to accept some settings compromises if you want to game seriously at 4K.
This is a dual-slot card that is identical in size to the RTX 4070 Founders Edition, as well as utilizing the same cooling solution, so it will run a slight bit hotter thanks to the increased power flowing into the card, but it's not a whole lot so that it'd be noticeable.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super: Performance
Outstanding overall performance
12GB VRAM hampers 4K potential
Falls behind RX 7800 XT somewhat in gaming performance
In terms of performance, the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super is about as solid a graphics card as you'll find in the midrange, offering fantastic gaming performance, while outshining the competition in non-gaming tasks like content creation and compute-heavy workloads.
Image 1 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 8 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 9 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 10 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 11 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 12 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 13 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 14 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 15 of 15
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
During synthetic workload tests, the RTX 4070 Super loses out somewhat to the RX 7800 XT on some tests while winning out on others, so when you don't factor in ray tracing, it's a bit of a wash. Once ray tracing is included, however, you so end up with about 23% stronger ray tracing performance for the RTX 4070 Super, which is expected given the maturity of Nvidia's tech versus AMD's.
It's also worth noting that the Nvidia RTX 4070 Super's compute performance is about 18% better than the RX 7800 XT, and overall, the RTX 4070 Super outperforms the RTX 4070 by about 17%, on average.
Image 1 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Moving on to creative benchmarks, as expected, the Nvidia RTX 4070 Super outperforms the AMD RX 7800 XT when it comes to 3D rendering tasks thanks to the strength of Nvidia's CUDA processing, which most renderers use.
In terms of rasterization performance, the two cards are about even, while the RTX 4070 Super pulls slightly ahead of the RX 7800 XT in terms of video encoding, but only by about 1%. Over its predecessor, the RTX 4070 Super renders 3D scenes and rasterizes noticeably faster, but it's pretty much even on the video encoding side.
Image 1 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 8 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 9 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 10 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 11 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 12 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 13 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 14 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
When it comes to gaming performance, however, the RX 7800 XT pulls ahead of the RTX 4070 Super in a big way, especially at lower resolutions.
In 1080p gaming, the RTX 4070 Super consistently lags behind the RX 7800 XT when ray tracing isn't factored in, and when it is, this advantage is generally diminished (on average) when bringing balanced upscaling to bear, though the RTX 4070 Super and the RTX 4070 tend to do much better than the RX 7800 XT when pure ray tracing is involved.
Against its predecessor, the RTX 4070 Super offers about a 14% average FPS increase over the RTX 4070 at 1080p, an advantage that I expect will grow wider once better drivers are released to support the RTX 4070 Super post-release.
Image 1 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 2 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 3 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 4 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 5 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 6 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 7 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 8 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 9 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 10 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 11 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 12 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 13 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 14 of 14
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The story is similar with 1440p gaming where the RX 7800 XT does generally outperform the RTX 4070 Super when ray tracing isn't involved, and lags behind when it is.
Upscaling helps here as well, but broadly speaking, the RTX 4070 Super is going to outperform the RX 7800 XT when ray tracing, and overall provides about a 9% better fps than the RTX 4070, on average. I suspect this latter figure will be higher once post-release drivers are installed, since the RTX 4070 outperforms the RTX 4070 Super in Metro: Exodus when it shouldn't, and so i believe this game is a bit of a driver outlier.
Image 1 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 8 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 9 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 10 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 11 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 12 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 13 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 14 of 14
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
At 4K, the RX 7800 XT manages to hold up better in absolute terms thans to its larger 16GB frame buffer vs the RTX 4070 Super's 12GB, but the GDDR6X memory and more mature ray tracing cores make ray tracing at 4K a better overall experience with the RTX 4070 Super than with either of the two other cards tested against here.
Ultimately, then, it comes down to whether you're really all that enthusiastic about ray tracing performance. If so, the RTX 4070 Super is the card you're going to want, but at $100 cheaper, the RX 7800 XT offers a much more compelling option for pure rasterized graphics than the RTX 4070 Super. This, ultimately, keeps the RTX 4070 Super from running away with the title of best midrange graphics card, but it's a much tougher fight for the RX 7800 XT than it was when it first launched against the RTX 4070.
Performance score: 4.5/5
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Should you buy the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super?
Buy the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super if…
You want the best midrange graphics card overall Given the strength of this card in all categories, on balance, it's the best you're going to find in the midrange.
You want very strong ray tracing performance With the maturity of its ray tracing cores, the RTX 4070 Super is the best ray tracing GPU in the midrange, for sure.
You want some creative performance as well With its strong CUDA backbone, the RTX 4070 Super is a great option for those looking to get into creative content work, especially 3D modeling.
Don’t buy it if…
You don't want to spend a fortune Given the price of the competition, there are better graphics cards for your money than the RTX 4070 Super
You don't care about ray tracing or compute The strongest asset this card brings to the table are its ray tracing and tensor cores, but if you don't care about ray tracing or machine learning tasks, the RX 7800 XT will offer a better overall gaming performance.
Also consider
AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is arguably the best gaming GPU for most gamers, and at a substantial discount from the RTX 4070 Super, it's a hard card to ignore.
Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 The RTX 4070 might not be as fast as the RTX 4070 Super or have as many processing cores, but it is still a powerful midrange graphics card that's going to be a lot cheaper now that the RTX 4070 Super has hit the shelves.
I spent about a week working with the Nvidia RTX 4070 Super, including using it as my main work PC graphics card for content creation work. I ran our standard battery of tests on it and its two main competitor cards due to time constraints (you can see my RTX 4070 review for its relative performance versus many more cards, and than consider a roughly 12%-15% better performance over that for the RTX 4070 Super).
I've been reviewing computer hardware, including graphics cards, for years now, and I am intimately familiar with the kind of performance you should expect from a graphics card at this price point. I bring that knowledge to bear on my graphics card reviews and make sure that every graphics card I compare to the card under review is retested using the most up-to-date drivers to get the best relevant data for comparison, even (as in this case) it means I only test the most relevant competing cards to provide the reader with the most important comparative data when they are considering making their next graphics card purchase.
First reviewed in January 2024
We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.
When we reviewed the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Founders Edition earlier this year, we were slightly disappointed with the mid-range offering from its small performance boost compared to the base 4060 (let alone 3060 Ti) alongside 8GB VRAM and design issues. Regardless of its faults, it was still a worthy buy for many reasons, like DLSS 3 being the current standard when it comes to AI upscaling tech while overall ray tracing performance saw significant improvements as well. As third-party versions of the GPU have been released, the PNY Geforce RTX 4060 Ti is a strong contender for the best graphics card using the RTX 4060 Ti GPU available on the market.
Despite still inheriting the under-the-hood flaws of Founders Edition, the PNY take on the GPU makes some significant improvement in terms of its design. The most obvious is that it only needs a single-power 8-pin PCIe power connector and not the special 16-pin adapter. Of course, this means opportunities for overclocking are severely diminished.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Meanwhile, having only 8GB VRAM is a shame considering that many of the most visually impressive AAA games released over the past year blows past that even at 1080p. When it comes to best bang for buck, the 16GB RTX 4060 Ti can be purchased for around $50 more. With DLSS 3 also comes Frame Generation. This employs AI-enhanced hardware to enhance resolution by generating new frames and interleaving them among pre-rendered GPU frames. While this enhances the fluidity and visual smoothness of games during rendering, it comes with the trade-off of heightened latency and input lag. Then there’s the reality that only around 50 games even support Frame Generation.
Even when pushing the PNY RTX 4060 Ti past its limit, it still manages to keep cool and quiet. Just be mindful that aesthetically, the overall design is a bit bland. If a potential buyer is looking for something to complement their RGB lighting extravaganza build, it’ll unfortunately stand out like a sore thumb. Compared to the Founders Edition, Nvidia still is unmatched with the sleek unified build.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Those looking for raw native power in the 1440p or above range will need to look at the best 1440p graphics cards and best 4K graphics cards, but this GPU becomes more of a testament to how awesome DLSS 3 is in terms of AI upscaling. Not only can this make 1440p gaming a pleasurable experience, it can handle some games at 4K with some settings tinkering.
If a fantastic 1080p experience playing more esports games at high frame rates like Fortnite and League of Legends matters more than playing Cyberpunk 2077 or Alan Wake II at max settings, the PNY GeForce RTX 4060 Ti could be considered a seriously attractive purchase, especially when it comes to form over function.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
PNY GeForce RTX 4060 Ti: Price & availability
How much does it cost? MSRP listed at $389 but can be found for around $350 (around £395/AU$575)
When is it available? Available now
Where can you get it? Available in the US, UK, and Australia
The PNY Geforce RTX 4060 Ti is currently available now in the US, UK and Australia. Though the MSRP on PNY’s online store is $389, it can be found for as low as $350 on other stores like Amazon or Newegg. Due to the more 1:1 nature of the PNY take vs. the Founders Edition, interested buyers are usually going to save a solid $10 for the same performance.
For PC Gamers on a budget, those looking for one of the best cheap graphics cards for their new rig can look toward its AMD rival the RX 7700 XT. Be mindful that AMD FidelityFX isn’t as good as DLSS, Nvidia simply does ray tracing better at the moment and that card is about $40 more. However, the Radeon RX 7700 XT comes packed in with 12GB VRAM if that matters. When it comes to overall gaming experience between the two, the Geforce RTX 4060 Ti is a very solid performer.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
PNY GeForce RTX 4060 Ti: Specs
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Should you buy the PNY GeForce RTX 4060 Ti?
Buy the PNY GeForce RTX 4060 Ti if...
You require great native 1080p performance The AD106 GPU features phenomenal 1080p performance even with Ray Tracing enabled where it applies.
You want the best upscaling tech available
DLSS3 improves on the steller upscaling tech and allows some fantastic performance alongside image quality at 1440p. For games that use it, Frame Generation pushes that even further.
Don't buy it if...
You require more than 8GBs of VRAM Right now, running visually demanding games at 1080p with max settings alongside ray-tracing may bring the graphics card down to its knees with only 8GBs of VRAM. It may be best to get the 16GB 4060 Ti for around $50 more.
You are looking to push your graphics card to the absolute limit Compared to the 16-pin PCIe power connector set-up of the Founders Edition, slicing that in half does limit potential overclocking.
PNY GeForce RTX 4060 Ti: Also consider
How I tested the PNY GeForce RTX 4060 Ti
I spend about two weeks with the PNY GeForce RTX 4060 Ti
I played games alongside Adobe creative Suite including Premier Pro and Photoshop
I used the PNY GeForce RTX 4060 Ti as the graphics card on my main computer for about two weeks.
Some of the games played included Dead Space (2023), Cyberpunk 2077, Alan Wake II, and Starfield. Outside of gaming, video and photo content was created on Photoshop and Premiere Pro. Considering this is a 1:1 spec of the 4060 Founders Edition, the benchmarks were the same.
We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.
To say the Hyte Y70 Touch is the culmination of a major PC building trend we've seen over the past few years feels like it doesn't do this case justice.
Back in ye olden dæges, even the best PC case was just an aluminum box with a panel that would open up to let you dig into the guts of your computer. But like every other kind of electronic device, it was purposefully designed to hide everything on the inside. After all, who wants to look at printed circuit boards, soldered ICs, and maybe a dusty fan mounted onto the CPU that 95% of people never bothered to clean?
We've come a long way since then, and as PC enthusiasts and gamers invest serious money into their builds, the impulse to show it all off became too great to ignore. We've since introduced plastic side panels, then tempered glass, and in the last five or six years, we've started to see cases that resemble the kind of glass housing once reserved for museums so builders could show off their hard work.
What they haven't really done before, however, is have an off-the-shelf case that integrates functionality into this cutaway case design, since glass is glass and it's only really good for looking through and providing a small measure of physical protection.
Hyte, on the other hand, decided to swap out the corner panel of its already excellent Y60 PC case for a 4K interactive touchscreen that has literally stopped several of my coworkers in their tracks this past week so they could gawk at the video wallpaper, clock, and Twitch chat window embedded into the touchscreen along the corner edge of the Y70.
To be fair, they weren't around to watch me stumble through the process of setting up the touchscreen, since it's really just a second Windows display like any one of the best monitors you'll find, though its 1100x3840p resolution makes it a meh-level second display without Hyte's Nexus software.
Once you install and run the software, it will do all the hard work of actually configuring the display to embed widgets, system information like CPU temperature, and even app shortcuts to put your favorite software a quick touch away.
Of course, to get the case's display to work, it needs to be connected to your graphics card via a DisplayPort connection, so you'll need a graphics card capable of multimonitor support as well as a free DisplayPort output. Nearly all of the best graphics cards, and even most of the best cheap graphics cards, will come with at least two DisplayPort connections, but if you're already running a multimonitor setup, you will likely need to do some cable juggling to make sure your graphics card can run the touchpanel.
Image 1 of 6
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 2 of 6
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 3 of 6
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 4 of 6
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 5 of 6
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Image 6 of 6
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
As for what you can do with the touch panel, there's actually quite a bit, including adding widgets for quicker access or displaying system information, or possibly taking a break from playing the best PC games to play a Tetris-style brick dropper instead.
And while this might feel a bit gimmicky, the program shortcuts are an absolute lifesaver as someone who has dozens of windows open on my desktop at any given time.
Finding the shortcut to launch Photoshop on my desktop comes in varying degrees of difficulty depending on how much junk I've dropped onto my desktop over the past few weeks. Being able to turn slightly and touch the Hyte Y70 Touch's display to bring up photoshop is the kind of small thing that adds up to minutes and hours of reclaimed time over weeks and months of use.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The Nexus software is more or less fine, and it comes with a number of presets that you can run as live backgrounds on the display. One thing to note is that you need to use this software to setup the touch display properly, so once you've built the PC and have successfully booted it up, download and install the software before you do anything else and work through Hyte Nexus.
It's through this software as well that you can build up pages of widgets, turning the Hyte Y70's front-corner panel into something with a smartphone-like interface, making it about as intuitive as it gets.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
When it comes to actual hardware, the case doesn't come with any fans, but it has room to install up to 10 chassis fans, as well as a 360mm long x 125mm thick radiator on the side and another 360mm long x 68mm thick radiator along the top. You have a lot of options for cooling the rig, but definitely focus on intaking air from the bottom and back of the case, as the front and side walls are glass, so you'll have to be conscientious about proper airflow.
Fortunately, as a dual-chamber case, many of the hottest components are separated to allow for easier cooling and air circulation. The biggest and most obvious way this is done is through the vertically mounted GPU thanks to an included riser. It doesn't hurt that it also shows off your GPU.
In terms of rear capacity, there are two internal drive bays that can fit a pair of the best hard drives at 3.5-inches, or up to four 2.5-inch SATA SSDs. The PSU bay is roomy as well, making cable management easier than with a tighter mid-or-full tower case, which can jam even the best PSUs.
There's more than enough room in the front chamber, so whichever of the best graphics cards you install, the Y70's 16.6-inch GPU clearance is more than enough. It is also able to vertically mount up to a four-slot card, so if that Nvidia Titan RTX refresh ever comes along, you just might be able to fit it in here.
This extra capacity also makes cable management a much easier problem to solve, and even though this is a very premium PC case, it's incredibly user-and-newbie friendly. You'll still have to know where and how you should install various case components like fans and lighting, but the easy-open case gives you all the room you need to work, even if you barely know what you're doing.
And while I am going to rave about this case from here to CES and beyond, it's not all lovely touchscreens and roomy interior. If there's one complaint I have with this case, it would be its price. Coming in at $359.99 / £349.99 (about AU$560), this is significantly more expensive than the Hyte Y60 or Lian-Li O11 Vision, which comes in at just $139.
Of course, none of those cases have a 4K touchscreen interface built-in, so the price isn't unreasonable for what you're getting, but this is a premium case nonetheless, so those on a budget might want to shop around for something more in line with their budget.
Hyte Y70 Touch: Price & availability
How much does it cost? $359.99 / £349.99 (about AU$560)
When and where can you get it? Available in US right now, with UK and Australia availability coming in December
The Hyte Y70 Touch is available in the US right now for $359.99, with a December launch planned for the UK and Australia. The UK retail price will be £349.99, and should sell for about AU$560 in Australia.
This is a roughly 80% price increase over the Hyte Y60, though that case does not include a touch display.
Hyte Y70 Touch: Specs
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Should you buy the Hyte Y70 Touch?
Buy the Hyte Y70 Touch if...
You want an absolute showpiece The Hyte Y70 Touch will draw a crowd if you let it. I know from personal experience.
You want to have a host of functions and apps at your fingertips
The 4K touchscreen on the Y70 makes it easy to pull up apps, track Twitch chat, and monitor system conditions with ease.
Don't buy it if...
You're on a budget
This is a very premium PC case, so if money's tight, forget about the touchscreen and opt for the Hyte Y60 instead.
You have limited desk space
This is a honking big PC case. If your desk looks like the aftermath of Verdun, you might want to go for something with a smaller footprint.
Hyte Y70 Touch: Also consider
If my Hyte Y70 Touch review has you looking for other options, here are two more PC cases to consider...
We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.
The Seagate FireCuda 540 is one of the first high-profile Gen 5 NVMe SSDs to hit the market for those who are running one of the best processors for gaming and best motherboards that are PCIe 5.0 compatible.
It’s more than just a successor to the widely popular Seagate FireCuda 530 from a couple of years ago, though, it’s a drive that shows you exactly what the next generation is capable of, but at a cost.
The greatest cost will be to your wallet, because this flagship Gen 5 NVMe SSD carries a particularly high MSRP regardless of where you are in the world. That’s because current motherboard support for Gen 5 NVMe SSDs is limited to the most recent AMD CPU generation with socket AM5 and the current crop of Intel LGA 1700 options. You’re paying a pretty penny to be an early adopter without factoring in the cost in, ultimately.
Speaking of cost, the Seagate FireCuda 540 currently retails for $189.99 (around £150 / AU$300) for 1TB and $319.99 (approximately £260 / $AU$500) for 2TB which is far from cheap.
For context, you can currently find Gen 4 alternatives such as the aforementioned FireCuda 530 and the excellent Kingston Fury Renegade SSD for a fraction of the price for around a 30% performance reduction. That’s long been the case with early adoption, however, you’re paying a premium to be on the bleeding edge, and the results do speak for themselves.
That’s because the Seagate FireCuda 540 absolutely lives up to its claims of 10,000 MB/s sequential performance with both its reads and writes when plugged into to a Gen 5 compatible NVMe M.2 port. The question remains of whether you need this level of sequential performance right now, or if you just want to be ready for when some of the best PC games will take advantage.
Considering just how slow the adoption of Gen 4 SSDs were to the mainstream, having launched in 2019 before being adopted in 2020 and 2021 for PC and PS5, we could be waiting a couple of years to really see software push this hardware in any meaningful way. Still, the Seagate FireCuda 540 is undoubtably a top contender for best SSD of 2023, even if it still feels a bit ahead of its time.
(Image credit: Seagate)
Seagate FireCuda 540: Price & availability
How much does it cost? Starting at $189.99 (around £150 / AU$300)
When is it available? Available now
Where can you get it? Available in the US, UK, and Australia
The Seagate FireCuda 540 is currently available in the US, the UK, and Australia with a starting price of $189.99 (around £150 / AU$300) for 1TB and $319.99 (approximately £260 / $AU$500) for 2TB.
For contrast, that’s a similar price that you will expect to pay for Gen 5 offerings such as the Corsair MP700 which carries an MSRP of $179.99 (about £147.99 / AU$280) for 1TB and $284.99 (around £230 / AU$430) for 2TB. Simply put, these Gen 5 drives are by no means cheap and you are paying a premium when getting in on the ground floor.
Seagate FireCuda 540: Specs
Seagate FireCuda 540: Design & features
Things are kept simple in terms of the physical and visual design of the Seagate FireCuda 540, and that’s for the best considering it will live under a motherboard heatsink from the second it’s installed into your PC. A simple sticker covers the controller and the DRAM with the company’s logo and the name of the drive itself on one side and that’s your lot.
More interesting is the choice of controller itself. That’s because the Seagate FireCuda 540 is running the Phison E26 controller, which is significantly faster than the already excellent Phison E18 controller as featured in many of the best M.2 SSDs to hit the market over the last four years. That’s only one side of the story, though, because further adding to the lightning-fast performance here is the 232-Layer Micron TLC flash memory on board coupled with LPDDR4 DRAM cache for short term memory reads, as many top-end drives include.
While this is a Gen 5x4 drive through and through, it’s also backwards compatible with older 4x4 NVMe slots as well and will cap the performance out at around 7,300 MB/s read and write respectively, however, if you don’t own a PCIe 5.0-ready motherboard then you’re burning money buying one of these to serve for this reason. The rated write endurance is also solid and roughly works out blow-for-blow with the capacity itself. Our review unit is rated at 2000TB for 2TB, however, the 1TB variant is good for 1000TB which is pretty decent overall.
(Image credit: Seagate)
Seagate FireCuda 540: Performance
It may cost a pretty penny but there’s no denying that the Seagate FireCuda 540 absolutely excels as at the top-end of what NVMe drives are physically capable of in 2023. In our industry-standard tests, such as with CrystalDiskMark 8, the drive was absolutely able to hit the quoted performance caps by delivering 10,092.67 MB/s read and 10,144.55 MB/s writes respectively which absolutely blows even the leading Gen 4.0 models out of the water.
This is further compounded by the random 4K read and writes as well as the Seagate FireCuda 540 offered up 625.68 and 476 read and write respectively, which is among the best I’ve personally seen from an NVMe SSD in all my years of testing. AnvilPro further highlighted the finesse of this drive with a total overall score of 30,163.68 which I hadn’t personally seen go so high in all my many reviews of NVMe hardware. Generally speaking, a top-end Gen 4 drive would output around 25,000, so that’s a good 20% increase straight out of the gate.
Furthermore, in our in-house 25GB file transfer test, the Seagate FireCuda 540 further shined with a time of just 16 seconds which comprised a total of 3,716 files including documents, videos, photos, and programs. That’s seriously fast, and goes to show the power of the Phison E26 controller in tandem with the 232-Layer Micron TLC flash memory.
In terms of real-world file transfer times, from a Gen 4 NVMe drive over to the Seagate FireCuda 540 is equally impressive. This can be evidenced with Assassin’s Creed Valhalla’s mammoth file size of 158.78 GB transferring to the Gen 5 model in just 58 seconds. Similarly, smaller titles such as Deathloop with its 30.98 file size made the jump in only 11 seconds which works out to around 3GB/sec. That’s blisteringly fast, and further cements the sequential prowess of this drive in action.
There is a caveat, though, and that’s the fact that no PC games right now are really optimized for blisteringly quick sequential performance on offer right now. That isn’t to say that future releases won’t be able to take advantage, but games don’t even need a Gen 4 yet to run optimally barring a small list of exceptions. What you’re ultimately buying is futureproofing and insurance so that bigger games that benefit from an SSD will run flawlessly for extra overhead instead of being an essential purchase right now.
(Image credit: Seagate)
Should you buy the Seagate FireCuda 540?
Buy the Seagate FireCuda 540 if...
You want a futureproofed machine By purchasing a Seagate FireCuda 540 with a PCIe 5.0 motherboard, you’ve guaranteeing your system will be able to run the future of titles which may need a faster drive than what’s available to most users.
You want leading sequential performance from your NVMe SSD
The Seagate FireCuda 540 is unrivaled in its sequential performance excelling up to 10,000 MB/s read and write respectively which few NVMe drives can boast right now.
You want good value for money While incredibly impressive, the Seagate FireCuda 540 isn’t exactly an essential purchase for anyone on PC right now apart from enthusiasts. No software really needs or benefits from 10,000 MB/s right now, but that could change in the near future.
The Gigabyte Radeon RX 7700 XT Gaming OC is the best version of a difficult card to recommend generally, but it goes a good way towards ameliorating the biggest issue I had with the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT: its price.
The Gigabyte Radeon RX 7700 XT Gaming OC is available for $439.99 (about £360/AU$695), which is only $10 less than AMD's official MSRP for the RX 7700 XT, so it's not the biggest savings here, but it does make this card at least somewhat more competitively priced with the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 Ti, which comes in at $399.99 (about £320/AU$630).
However, it's not just a price cut off the reference MSRP from AMD that makes the Gigabyte RX 7700 XT card a good bargain. You also get some extra perks over AMD's reference specs to make it more enticing as well, making it one of the best graphics card options for midrange gamers on a tighter budget.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Starting with the design, you get a triple-fan design that definitely helps thermal performance, which isn't egregious on the RX 7700 XT to begin with. There is no reference card for the RX 7700 XT, mind you, but given that the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT does have a reference card that sports a dual-fan design, you do get something over the higher-tier AMD card.
That's not nothing, and the card itself isn't so long that it can't fit inside a typical midtower PC case. The RX 7700 XT does require a good bit more power than the RTX 4060 Ti (245W to the 4060 Ti's 160W), so it needs two 8-pin power connectors to run it. On the other hand, it doesn't require a 16-pin power cable like the rest of Nvidia's reference RTX 4000-series cards.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The Gigabyte card also lacks any real RGB lighting beyond the Gigabyte logo along the top edge of the card, which is either a good thing or a bad thing, depending on your perspective, but it's good to have options regardless. Non-RGB fans will appreciate the more subdued aesthetics of this GPU for sure.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
In terms of ports, you have your standard 2 x HDMI 2.1 and 2 x DisplayPort 2.1 output on most AMD RX 7000-series cards, so you can hook it up to several of the best gaming monitors of your choosing.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Performance-wise, you can read more about the individual benchmarks in my RX 7700 XT review, and for the most part, the Gigabyte RX 7700 XT Gaming OC card performs a few percentage points better than the XFX Speedster QICK319 RX 7700 XT Black card given that it has about 100MHz higher game clock and a roughly 55MHz faster boost clock.
The difference is only going to be a few fps depending on the game you're playing, but given the Gigabyte card is cheaper, you're really getting extra FPS for less money, which is a fantastic deal no matter how you look at it.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
In the end, then, the Gigabyte Radeon RX 7700 XT Gaming OC makes a strong case for the RX 7700 XT, especially if spending north of $400 is really stretching your budget to the max. My original criticism that the RX 7700 XT is just too close in price to the AMD RX 7800 XT to make it the best 1440p graphics card to buy still applies to this card, but Gigabyte at least offers more than a non-OC card at a better price to make it a much more palatable purchase if you can't go for the RX 7800 XT.
How much does it cost? $439.99 (about £360/AU$640)
When is it available? Available now
Where can you get it? Available in the US, UK, and Australia
The Gigabyte Radeon RX 7700 XT Gaming OC is available now for $439.99 (about £360/AU$695). This is cheaper even than the AMD reference spec's MSRP of $449.99, and offers a better value by giving you some extra performance thanks to its factory overclocking.
It also brings you closer in price to the Nvidia RTX 4060 Ti while generally outperforming it. All in all, this is still too expensive to be the best cheap graphics card on the market, but it's definitely the best cheap midrange graphics card you're going to find.
Gigabyte Radeon RX 7700 XT Gaming OC: Specs
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Should you buy the Gigabyte Radeon RX 7700 XT Gaming OC?
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Buy it if...
You want great 1440p performance on a tighter budget This card offers great 1440p performance for the price, especially if you can't stretch your budget to the RX 7800 XT.
You want some extra overclocked performance for free
Normally, OC cards cost more than the reference card, but this one actually costs less than AMD's official MSRP.
Don't buy it if...
You can stretch your budget to get the AMD RX 7800 XT With the AMD RX 7800 XT offering such incredible performance, if you can stretch your budget to get that card (especially the Gigabyte Radeon RX 7800 XT Gaming OC), you absolutely should.
You want better content creation performance
If you're a content creator working with 3D rendering or other GPU intensive creative workloads, chances are an Nvidia card is going to offer much better performance than anything AMD can offer.
Gigabyte Radeon RX 7700 XT Gaming OC: Also consider
How I tested the Gigabyte Radeon RX 7700 XT Gaming OC
I spent about three weeks with the Gigabyte Radeon RX 7700 XT Gaming OC
I used it to play games, produce and edit creative content, and more
I used our standard battery of benchmarking tools to test it
I spent about three weeks with the Gigabyte Radeon RX 7700 XT Gaming OC, running my standard suite of benchmarks as well as assessing its general performance in real-world use cases.
I paid special attention to its gaming performance, since this is specifically targeting gamers, and paid less attention to its content creation performance since non-Radeon Pro cards are generally not marketed for those purposes.
I've been a computer hardware reviewer for years now and have tested all the latest graphics cards of the past several generations as well as having nearly a decade of computer science education, so I know my way around this kind of hardware. What's more, as a lifelong gamer, I know what to expect from a graphics card at this price point in terms of gaming performance.
We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.
The Intel Core i9-14900K is a hard chip to justify, which is a weird thing to say about a processor that is arguably the best Intel has ever put out.
With very little fanfare to herald its arrival following the announcement of Intel Meteor Lake at Intel Innovation in September 2023 (and confirmation that Intel Meteor Lake is coming to desktop in 2024), Intel's 14th-generation flagship processor cannot help but draw parallels to the 11th-gen Rocket Lake chips that immediately preceded Intel Alder Lake.
The Core i9-11900K was something of a placeholder in the market until Intel could launch Alder Lake at the end of 2021. Those processors featured a new hybrid architecture and a more advanced 10nm process that helped propel Intel back to the top of our best processor list, despite strong competition from AMD.
With Intel Raptor Lake Refresh, we're back in placeholder territory, unfortunately. The performance gains here are all but non-existent, so we are essentially waiting on Meteor Lake while the i9-14900K absolutely guzzles electricity and runs hot enough to boil water under just about any serious workload with very little extra performance over the Intel Core i9-13900K to justify the upgrade.
The problem for the Core i9-14900K is that you can still get the i9-13900K.
It's not that the Core i9-14900K isn't a great processor; again, it's unquestionably the best Intel processor for the consumer market in terms of performance. It beats every other chip I tested in most categories with the exception of some multitasking workflows and average gaming performance, both of which it comes in as a very close runner-up. On top of that, at $589, it's the same price as the current Intel flagship, the Intel Core i9-13900K (assuming the i9-14900K matches the i9-13900K's £699 / AU$929 sale price in the UK and Australia).
The problem for the Core i9-14900K is two-fold: you can still get the i9-13900K and will be able to for a long while yet at a lower price, and the Intel Core i7-14700K offers performance so close to the 14th-gen flagship at a much lower price that the 14900K looks largely unnecessary by comparison. Essentially, If you've got an i7-13700K or i9-13900K, there's is simply nothing for you here.
If you're on an 11th-gen chip or older, or you've got an AMD Ryzen processor and you're looking to switch, this chip will be the last one to use the LGA 1700 socket, so when Meteor Lake-S comes out in 2024 (or even Lunar Lake-S, due out at the end of 2024 or early 2025), you won't be able to upgrade to that processor with an LGA 1700 motherboard. In other words, upgrading to an LGA 1700 for this chip is strictly a one-shot deal.
The only people who might find this chip worth upgrading to are those currently using a 12th-gen processor who skipped the 13th-gen entirely, or someone using a 13th-gen core i5 who wants that extra bit of performance and doesn't mind dropping $589 on a chip they might be upgrading from again in a year's time, which isn't going to be a whole lot of people.
Unfortunately, at this price, it'll be better to save your money and wait for Meteor Lake or even Lunar Lake to drop next year and put the $589 you'd spend on this chip towards the new motherboard and CPU cooler you'll need once those chips are launched.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Intel Core i9-14900K: Price & availability
How much does it cost? US MSRP $589 (about £470/AU$855)
When is it out? October 17, 2023
Where can you get it? You can get it in the US, UK, and Australia
The Intel Core i9-14900K is available as of October 17, 2023, for a US MSRP of $589 (about £470/AU$855), which is the same as the Intel Core i9-13900K it is replacing. We don't have confirmation on UK and Australia pricing yet, though I've asked Intel for clarification and will update this review if and when I hear back from the company. If the 14900K keeps the same UK and Australia pricing as the Core i9-13900K, however, it'll sell for £699/AU$929 in the UK and Australia respectively.
This does make the Core i9-14900K the better value against these chips, especially given the level of performance on offer, but it's ultimately too close to the 13900K performance-wise to make this price meaningful, as a cheaper 13900K will offer an even better value against AMD's Ryzen 9 lineup.
Price score: 3 / 5
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Intel Core i9-14900K: Specs & features
Faster clock speeds than i9-13900K
Some additional AI-related features
The Intel Core i9-14900K is the final flagship using Intel's current architecture, so it makes sense that there is very little in the way of innovation over the Intel Core i9-13900K.
Using the same 10nm Intel 7 process node as its predecessor and with the same number of processor cores (8 P-cores/16 E-cores), threads (32), and cache (32MB total L2 cache plus additional 36MB L3 cache), the only real improvement with the 14900K in terms of specs are its faster clock speeds.
All cores get a 0.2GHz increase to their base frequencies, while the P-core turbo boost clock increases to 5.6GHz and the E-core turbo clock bumps up to 4.4GHz from the 13900K's 5.4GHz P-Core turbo clock and 4.3GHz E-core turbo clock.
While those clock speeds are the official max turbo clocks for the two types of cores, the Core i9-14900K and Intel Core i7-14700K have something called Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0, which increases the frequency of the best-performing core in the chip and gives it even more power within the power and thermal limits. That gets the Core i9-14900K up to 5.8GHz turbo clock on specific P-cores while active.
Additionally, an exclusive feature of the Core i9 is an additional Ludicrous-Speed-style boost called Intel Thermal Velocity Boost. This activates if there is still power and thermal headroom on a P-core that is already being boosted by the Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0, and this can push the core as high as 6.0GHz, though these aren't typical operating conditions.
Both of these technologies are present in the 13900K as well, but the 14900K bumps up the maximum clock speeds of these modes slightly, and according to Intel, that 6.0GHz clock speed makes this the world's fastest processor. While that might technically be true, that 6.0GHz is very narrowly used so in practical terms, the P-Core boost clock is what you're going to see almost exclusively under load.
The Core i9-14900K has the same 125W TDP as the 13900K and the same 253W maximum turbo power as well, though power draw in bursts of less than 10ms can go far higher.
If this reads like a Redditor posting about their successful overclocking setup, then you pretty much get what this chip is about. If you're looking for something innovative about this chip, I'll say it again, you're going to have to wait for Meteor Lake.
The Core i9-14900K also has support for discrete Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4 connectivity, as does the rest of the 14th-gen lineup, as well as support for discrete Thunderbolt 5, both of which are still a long way down the road.
The only other thing to note is that there have been some AI-related inclusions that are going to be very specific to AI workloads that almost no one outside of industry and academia is going to be running. If you're hoping for AI-driven innovations for everyday consumers, let's say it once more, with feeling: You're going to have to wait for—
Chipset & features score: 3.5 / 5
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Intel Core i9-14900K: Performance
Best-in-class performance, but only by a hair
Gets beat by AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D and i7-14700K in gaming performance
Runs even hotter than the i9-13900K
If you took any elite athlete who's used to setting records in their sport, sometimes they break their previous record by a lot, and sometimes it's by milliseconds or fractions of an inch. It's less sexy, but it still counts, and that's really what we get here with the Intel i9-14900K.
On pretty much every test I ran on it, the Core i9-14900K edged out its predecessor by single digits, percentage-wise, which is a small enough difference that a background application can fart and cause just enough of a dip in performance that the 14900K ends up losing to the 13900K.
I ran these tests more times than I can count because I had to be sure that something wasn't secretly messing up my results, and they are what they are. The Core i9-14900K does indeed come out on top, but it really is a game of inches at this point.
Image 1 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 8 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 9 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 10 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 11 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 12 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 13 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Across all synthetic performance and productivity benchmarks, the Core i9-14900K comes out on top, with the notable exception of Geekbench 6.1's multi-core performance test, where the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X scores substantially higher, and the Passmark Performance Test's overall CPU score, which puts the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 9 7950X3D significantly higher. Given that all 16 cores of the 7950X and 7950X3D are full-throttle performance cores, this result isn't surprising.
Other than that though, it's the 14900K all the way, with a 5.6% higher geometric average on single-core performance than the 13900K. For multi-core performance, the 14900K scores a 3.1% better geometric average, and in productivity workloads, it scores a 5.3% better geometric average than its predecessor.
Against the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, the Core i9-14900K scores about 13% higher in single-core performance, about 1% lower in multi-core performance, and 5% better in productivity performance.
Image 1 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Creative benchmarks reveal something of a mixed bag for the Core i9-14900K. In all cases, it beats its predecessor by between 2.6% to as much as 10.9%. Against the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and 7950X3D, the Core i9-14900K consistently loses out when it comes to rendering workloads like Blender and V-Ray 5, but beats the two best AMD processors by just as much in photo and video editing. And since 3D rendering is almost leaning heavily on a GPU rather than the CPU, AMD's advantage here is somewhat muted in practice.
Image 1 of 6
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 6
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 6
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 6
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 6
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 6
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Gaming is another area where Intel had traditionally done well thanks to its strong single-core performance over AMD, but all that flipped with the introduction of AMD's 3D V-Cache.
While the Intel Core i9-14900K barely moves the needle from its predecessor's performance, it really doesn't matter, since the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D manages to ultimately score an overall victory and it's not very close. The Core i9-14900K actually manages a tie for fourth place with the Intel Core i7-13700K, with the Core i7-14700K edging it out by about 4 fps on average.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Of course, all this performance requires power, and lots of it. The Core i9-14900K pretty much matched the maximum recorded power draw of the Core i9-13900K, with less of a watt's difference between the two, 351.097W to 351.933, respectively.
The Core i9-14900K still managed to find a way to run hotter than its predecessor, however; something I didn't really think was possible. But there it is, the 14900K maxing out at 105ºC, three degrees hotter than the 13900K's max. It's the hottest I've ever seen a CPU run, and I'm genuinely shocked it was allowed to run so far past its official thermal limit without any overclocking on my part.
Performance: 3.5 / 5
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Intel Core i9-14900K: Verdict
The best chip for dedicated performance like video editing and productivity
There are better gaming processors out there for cheaper
The Intel Core i7-14700K offers a far better value
Image 1 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
In the final assessment then, the Core i9-14900K does manage to win the day, topping the leaderboard by enough of a margin to be a clear winner, but close enough that it isn't the cleanest of wins.
Overall, its single-core and productivity performance are its best categories, slightly faltering in creative workloads, and coming up short enough on gaming that it's not the chip I would recommend as a gaming CPU.
Like all Core i9s before it, the 14900K is the worst value of Intel's 14th-gen launch lineup, but it's better than its predecessor for the time being (though that advantage won't last very long at all), and it does manage to be a better value proposition than the Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 9 7950X3D, while matching the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, so all in all, not too bad for an enthusiast chip.
Still, the Intel Core i7-14700K is right there, and its superior balance of price and performance makes the Intel Core i9-14900K a harder chip to recommend than it should be.
Should you buy the Intel Core i9-14900K?
Buy the Intel Core i9-14900K if...
Don't buy it if...
Also Consider
If my Intel Core i9-14900K review has you considering other options, here are two processors to consider...
How I tested the Intel Core i9-14900K
I spent nearly two weeks testing the Intel Core i9-14900K
I ran comparable benchmarks between this chip and rival flagship processors
I gamed with this chip extensively
Test System Specs
These are the specs for the test system used for this review:
I spent about two weeks testing the Intel Core i9-14900K and its competition, using it mostly for productivity and content creation, with some gaming thrown in as well.
I used the standard battery of synthetic benchmarks I use for processor testing, and ran the same tests on rival chips from AMD as well as the other 14th-gen chips in the Raptor Lake Refresh launch lineup and 13th-generation Raptor Lake processors. For Intel chips, I used the same motherboard, RAM, SSD, and graphics card to ensure I was isolating just the CPU's performance across every chip. For AMD chips, I used a comparable AM5 motherboard so differences in the motherboard configuration and circuitry are mitigated to the largest extent possible.
I've been testing and reviewing computer hardware for years now, and with an extensive background in computer science, I know processors in and out, and I use that knowledge to ensure every chip is thoroughly tested.
We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.
The Intel Core i7-14700K is the workhorse CPU in the Intel's 14th generation launch line-up, and like any good workhorse, it's going to be the one to do the heavy lifting for this generation of processors. Fortunately for Intel, the Core i7-14700K succeeds in keeping Raptor Lake Refresh from being completely forgettable.
Of all the chips launched on October 17, 2023, the Core i7-14700K is the only one to get a substantive spec upgrade over its predecessor as well as a slight cut in price to just $409 (about £325/AU$595), which is $10 less than the Intel Core i7-13700K it replaces.
So what do you get for $10 less? Gen-on-gen, you don't get a whole lot of improvement (about 6% better performance overall compared to the 13700K), but that figure can be deceiving, since the Core i7-13700K was at the top of our best processor list for a reason.
With the 13700K's performance being within striking distance of the Intel Core i9-13900K, that 6% improvement for the 14700K effectively closes the gap, putting the 14700K within just 3% of the 13900K overall, and even allowing it to pull ahead in average gaming performance, losing out to only the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D.
Fortunately for Intel, the Core i7-14700K succeeds in keeping Raptor Lake Refresh from being completely forgetable.
Given its excellent mix of performance and price, the Intel Core i7-14700K could very well be the last Intel chip of the LGA 1700 epoch that anyone should consider buying, especially if you're coming from a 12th-gen chip.
With the Core i9-13900K outperforming the Intel Core i9-12900K by as much as 25% in some workloads, someone coming off an i9-12900K or lower will find it hard to believe that an i7 could perform this well, but that's where we're at. And with the i7-14700K coming in about 30% cheaper than the Intel Core i9-14900K, while still managing to come remarkably close in terms of its performance, the Intel Core i7-14700K is the Raptor Lake Refresh chip to buy if you're going to buy one at all.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Intel Core i7-14700K: Price & availability
How much does it cost? US MSRP $409 (about £325/AU$595)
When is it out? October 17, 2023
Where can you get it? You can get it in the US, UK, and Australia
The Intel Core i7-14700K is available on October 17, 2023, with a US MSRP of $409 (about £325/AU$595), which is a slight decrease from its predecessor's MSRP of $419 (about £335/AU$610), and about 31% lower than the Intel Core i9-14900K and 32% percent lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X.
It's also cheaper than the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, and just $10 more expensive than the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X, putting it very competitively priced against processors in its class.
The comparisons against the Core i9 and Ryzen 9 are far more relevant, however, since these are the chips that the Core i7-14700K are competing against in terms of performance, and in that regard, the Intel Core i7-14700K is arguably the best value among consumer processors currently on the market.
Price score: 4 / 5
Intel Core i7-14700K: Specs & features
Four additional E-Cores
Slightly faster clock speeds
Increased Cache
Discrete Wi-Fi 7 and Thunderbolt 5 support
The Intel Core i7-14700K is the only processor from Intel's Raptor Lake Refresh launch line-up to get a meaningful spec upgrade.
Rather than the eight performance and eight efficiency cores like the i7-13700K, the i7-14700K comes with eight performance cores and 12 efficiency cores, all running with a slightly higher turbo boost clock for extra performance. The i7-14700K also has something called Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0, which is a mouthful but also gives the best performing P-core an extra bump up to 5.6GHz so long as the processor is within power and thermal limits.
The increased core count also adds 7MB of additional L2 cache for the efficiency cores to use, further improving their performance over the 13700K's, as well as four additional processing threads for improved multitasking.
It has the same TDP of 125W and same Max Turbo Power rating of 253W as the 13700K, with the latter being the upper power limit of sustained (greater than one second) power draw for the processor. This ceiling can be breached, however, and processing cores can draw much more power in bursts as long as 10ms when necessary.
There is also support for discrete Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4 connectivity, as well as discrete Thunderbolt 5 wired connections, so there is a decent bit of future proofing in its specs.
Chipset & features score: 4 / 5
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Intel Core i7-14700K: Performance
Outstanding performance on par with the i9-13900K
Best gaming performance of any Intel processor
More power hungry than predecessor, so also runs hotter
The Intel Core i7-14700K is arguably the best performing midrange processor on the market, coming within striking distance of the Core i9-13900K and Ryzen 9 7950X across most workloads, including very strong multi core performance thanks to the addition of four extra efficiency cores.
Image 1 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 8 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 9 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 10 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 11 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 12 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 13 of 13
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
The strongest synthetic benchmarks for the 14700K are single core workloads, which puts it effectively level with the Core i9-13900K and often beating the Ryzen 9 7950X and 7950X3D chips handily.
This translates into better dedicated performance, rather than multitasking, but even there the Core i7-14700K does an admirable just keeping pace with chips with much higher core counts.
Image 1 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
In creative workloads, the 14700K also performs exceptionally well, beating out the 13900K on everything except 3D model rendering, which is something that is rarely given to a CPU to do any when even the best cheap graphics cards can process Blender or V-Ray 5 workloads many times faster than even the best CPU can.
Image 1 of 6
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 6
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 6
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 6
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 6
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 6
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
In gaming performance, the Core i7-14700K scores a bit of an upset over its launch sibling, the i9-14900K, besting it in gaming performance overall, though it has to be said that it got some help from a ridiculously-high average fps in Total War: Warhammer III's battle benchmark. In most cases, the i7-14700K came up short of the 13900K and 14900K, but not by much.
And while it might be tempting to write off Total War: Warhammer III as an outlier, one of the biggest issues with the Core i9's post-Alder Lake is that they are energy hogs and throttle under load quickly, pretty much by design.
In games like Total War: Warhammer III where there are a lot of tiny moving parts to keep track of, higher clock speeds don't necessarily help. When turbo clocks kick into high gear and cause throttling, the back-and-forth between throttled and not-throttled can be worse over the course of the benchmark than the cooler but consistent Core i7s, which don't have to constantly ramp up and ramp down.
So the 14700K isn't as much of an outlier as it looks, especially since the 13700K also excels at Total War: Warhammer III, and it too beats the two Core i9s. Total War: Warhammer III isn't the only game like this, and so there are going to be many instances where the cooler-headed 14700K steadily gets the work done while the hot-headed i9-13900K and 14900K sprint repeatedly, only to effectively tire themselves out for a bit before kicking back up to high gear.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
The additional efficiency cores might not draw as much power as the performance cores, but the additional power is still noticeable. The 14700K pulls down nearly 30W more watts than the 13700K, though it is still a far cry from the Core i9-13900K's power usage.
This additional power also means that the Core i7-14700K runs much hotter than its predecessor, maxing out at 100ºC, triggering the CPU to throttle on occasion. This is something that the i7-13700K didn't experience during my testing at all, so you'll need to make sure your cooling solution is up to the task here.
Performance: 4.5 / 5
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Intel Core i7-14700K: Verdict
Fantastic single-core performance
Intel's best gaming processor, and second overall behind the Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Best value of any midrange processor
Image 1 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 7
(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Ultimately, the Intel Core i7-14700K is the best processor in the Raptor Lake Refresh line-up, offering very competitive performance for a better price than its predecessor and far better one than comparable chips one tier higher in the stack.
It's not without fault, though. It's not that much better than the i7-13700K, so everything I'm saying about the i7-14700K might reasonably apply to its predecessor as well. And honestly, the i7-14700K doesn't have too high a bar to clear to standout from its launch siblings, so it's performance might only look as good in comparison to the i9 and i5 standing behind it.
But, the numbers don't lie, and the Intel Core i7-14700K displays flashes of brilliance that set it apart from its predecessor and vault it into competition with the top-tier of CPUs, and that's quite an achievement independent of how the rest of Raptor Lake Refresh fares.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Should you buy the Intel Core i7-14700K?
Buy the Intel Core i7-14700K if...
Don't buy it if...
Also Consider
If my Intel Core i7-14700K review has you considering other options, here are two processors to consider...
How I tested the Intel Core i7-14700K
I spent nearly two weeks testing the Intel Core i7-14700K
I ran comparable benchmarks between this chip and rival midrange processors
I gamed with this chip extensively
Test System Specs
These are the specs for the test system used for this review:
I spent about two weeks testing the Intel Core i7-14700K and its competition, primarily for productivity work, gaming, and content creation.
I used a standard battery of synthetic benchmarks that tested out the chip's single core, multi core, creative, and productivity performance, as well as built-in gaming benchmarks to measure its gaming chops.
I then ran the same tests on rival chips from AMD as well as the other 14th-gen chips in the Raptor Lake Refresh launch line-up and 13th-generation Raptor Lake processors. For Intel chips, I used the same motherboard, RAM, SSD, and graphics card to ensure I was isolating just the CPU's performance across every chip. For AMD chips, I used a comparable AM5 motherboard so differences in the motherboard configuration and circuitry are mitigated to the largest extent possible.
I've been testing and reviewing computer hardware for years now, and with an extensive background in computer science, I know processors in and out, and I use that knowledge to ensure every chip is thoroughly tested.
We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.