AX Gaming Rebel GeForce RTX 5070 X2W VS Colorful iGame GeForce RTX 5070 Ultra W OC

Both the AX Gaming Rebel RTX 5070 X2W and the Colorful iGame RTX 5070 Ultra W OC share the same underlying silicon foundation: identical 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 80 ROPs, a base GPU clock of 2325 MHz, and matched memory speeds of 1750 MHz. This means any performance difference between these two cards is not architectural — it comes down entirely to how aggressively each board partner has tuned the boost behavior.

That is where the iGame Ultra W OC pulls ahead. Its GPU turbo reaches 2557 MHz versus the Rebel's 2512 MHz — a 45 MHz advantage that directly translates into higher derived metrics: 31.42 TFLOPS of floating-point throughput versus 30.87 TFLOPS, and a texture rate of 490.9 GTexels/s against 482.3 GTexels/s. In practice, this roughly 1.8% clock advantage is unlikely to be perceptible in most gaming workloads, but it does mean the iGame will sustain marginally higher frame rates and slightly faster shader-heavy rendering tasks when both cards are running at their sustained boost ceilings.

In conclusion, the Colorful iGame RTX 5070 Ultra W OC holds a narrow but consistent performance edge in this group, driven purely by its higher factory boost clock. The AX Gaming Rebel is not meaningfully behind — the gap is small enough that real-world results will often fall within margin-of-error territory — but based strictly on the provided specifications, the iGame is the faster card on paper.

Across every memory specification provided, the AX Gaming Rebel RTX 5070 X2W and the Colorful iGame RTX 5070 Ultra W OC are completely identical. Both carry 12GB of GDDR7 VRAM over a 192-bit bus, running at an effective speed of 28000 MHz and delivering a maximum bandwidth of 672 GB/s. These are not configurable variables — they are fixed by the shared GPU die and memory specification, so no board partner can differentiate here.

The numbers themselves are worth contextualizing. GDDR7 at 672 GB/s represents a substantial generational leap in memory throughput, which benefits texture streaming, high-resolution asset loading, and AI-accelerated workloads. The 192-bit bus width is a practical constraint at this tier, but GDDR7's efficiency largely compensates — this bandwidth figure is competitive with wider-bus GDDR6X implementations from prior generations. ECC memory support on both cards is a minor but notable inclusion, adding a layer of data integrity useful in creative or compute workloads where memory errors could corrupt output.

This group is a clear and complete tie. There is no memory-related reason to prefer one card over the other — the decision must rest entirely on other specification groups.

Feature parity is total between these two cards. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate — the current ceiling for gaming API compatibility, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing, mesh shaders, and variable rate shading in supported titles. Alongside this, shared support for DLSS is a meaningful inclusion: NVIDIA's AI-driven upscaling allows both cards to render at lower internal resolutions and reconstruct high-quality output frames, delivering a tangible performance-to-image-quality benefit in a growing library of games.

On the practical side, both cards support up to 4 simultaneous displays and include Intel Resizable BAR, which allows the CPU to access the full GPU frame buffer at once rather than in smaller chunks — a feature that can reduce CPU-side bottlenecks in certain workloads. Neither card carries LHR restrictions, meaning compute and mining workloads run uncapped, and both include RGB lighting for users who factor aesthetics into their build.

With every feature in this group mirrored exactly, this is another unambiguous tie. Neither the Rebel nor the iGame Ultra W OC offers any functional or software capability the other lacks — the feature set is determined by the shared GPU platform, leaving no differentiating factor here.

The port configuration on both cards is identical: one HDMI 2.1b output and three DisplayPort outputs, for a total of four physical display connections — matching the four-display limit noted in the Features group. HDMI 2.1b is the latest revision of the standard, capable of driving 4K at high refresh rates and 8K output, making it well-suited for modern TVs and high-end monitors alike. The three DisplayPort outputs give multi-monitor users plenty of flexibility without adapters.

The absence of USB-C on either card is worth noting for users who own USB-C or Thunderbolt-based displays, as they would need an active adapter. However, since neither card offers it, this is not a differentiating factor — it is simply a shared limitation of both designs.

Predictably, this group ends in a tie. The connectivity layout is a platform-level decision that neither board partner has altered, so display compatibility and output options are equivalent regardless of which card you choose.

At the platform level, these two cards are once again built from the same blueprint: the Blackwell architecture on a 5nm process node, 31.1 billion transistors, a 250W TDP, and PCIe 5.0 connectivity. The shared TDP means both cards draw the same maximum power and will impose equivalent demands on your power supply and case airflow — no advantage to either side there.

The one concrete differentiator in this group is physical size. The AX Gaming Rebel measures 240 mm in length, while the Colorful iGame Ultra W OC stretches to 300.5 mm — a gap of over 60 mm. That is not a trivial difference. In compact or mid-tower cases with tight GPU clearance, the Rebel's shorter footprint can be the deciding factor between a card that fits and one that does not. Conversely, the iGame's larger PCB typically allows for a more spread-out cooling solution, which may contribute to its marginally higher sustained boost clock seen in the Performance group.

For this group, the AX Gaming Rebel RTX 5070 X2W holds a practical edge for anyone working with space-constrained builds. The iGame Ultra W OC is not at a disadvantage in a full-size case, but the Rebel's 240 mm length offers meaningfully broader compatibility — making it the more versatile choice based strictly on the data provided here.