Colorful iGame GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Ultra W OC VS MSI GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Gaming Trio Plus

At their core, the Colorful iGame RTX 5070 Ti Ultra W OC and the MSI RTX 5070 Ti Gaming Trio Plus are built on identical silicon foundations: the same 8960 shading units, 280 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 1750 MHz memory speed. This means any performance gap between them comes down entirely to how aggressively each card boosts its GPU clock — not architectural differences.

That gap is real, if modest. The iGame pulls ahead with a GPU turbo of 2497 MHz versus the MSI's 2452 MHz — a 45 MHz advantage. Because pixel fill rate, texture throughput, and floating-point performance all scale directly with clock speed, this translates into consistent, proportional leads: 44.75 TFLOPS vs 43.94 TFLOPS in raw compute, 699.2 GTexels/s vs 686.6 GTexels/s in texture throughput, and 239.7 GPixel/s vs 235.4 GPixel/s in pixel rate. In practice, these are roughly 1.8–2% differences — enough to show up in benchmarks but unlikely to be felt in actual gameplay frame rates.

The iGame Ultra W OC holds a clear, if narrow, performance edge in this category, driven solely by its higher factory overclock. For users who prioritize squeezing out every last frame or compute operation, it is the stronger choice here. The MSI Gaming Trio Plus, while technically trailing, remains extremely close — the real-world delta is small enough that factors outside this group (cooling, acoustics, price) may matter more to most buyers.

Memory is one area where there is simply nothing to separate these two cards. Both feature 16GB of GDDR7 running on a 256-bit bus at an effective speed of 28000 MHz, delivering identical peak bandwidth of 896 GB/s. Every number in this category is a perfect match.

That shared specification set is nonetheless worth contextualizing. GDDR7 represents a generational leap in memory technology, and 896 GB/s of bandwidth is substantially higher than what GDDR6X-based predecessors offered — meaning both cards are equally well-equipped to handle high-resolution textures, large AI model workloads, and memory-intensive rendering tasks. The 16GB frame buffer is also a comfortable target for 4K gaming and content creation in 2025, and ECC memory support on both cards adds a layer of data integrity that professionals running compute workloads will appreciate.

This group is a dead tie. Since every memory specification is shared down to the last detail, memory should play no role in choosing between the iGame Ultra W OC and the Gaming Trio Plus — buyers should look to other spec groups, such as performance clocks or thermal design, to make their decision.

Feature parity is total here. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate, ray tracing, and DLSS — the three pillars of modern GPU feature sets — and both drive up to 4 simultaneous displays. Since these are NVIDIA-based cards from the same generation, this outcome is expected, but it is worth noting that none of these capabilities are being traded away by choosing one card over the other.

A few of the shared features carry real practical weight. DLSS, NVIDIA's AI-driven upscaling technology, provides meaningful frame rate headroom at high resolutions without a proportional image quality cost — and both cards deliver it equally. Ray tracing support enables physically accurate lighting in compatible titles, and DirectX 12 Ultimate ensures both cards are positioned for the full range of current and near-future gaming APIs. Intel Resizable BAR support on both cards also allows the CPU to access the full GPU frame buffer simultaneously, which can yield modest performance improvements in supported games.

With every feature — from API support to display count to RGB lighting — matching exactly, this group is a complete tie. Neither the iGame Ultra W OC nor the Gaming Trio Plus holds any advantage here, and features should be removed from the decision-making equation entirely when comparing these two cards.

Connectivity is another area where these two cards are indistinguishable. Both offer the same layout: 1 HDMI 2.1b port and 3 DisplayPort outputs, totaling four display connections — which aligns with the four-display limit noted in their features. Neither card includes USB-C or any legacy outputs such as DVI or mini DisplayPort.

The port selection is well-suited for modern use cases. HDMI 2.1b supports 4K at high refresh rates and 8K output, making it compatible with the latest gaming monitors and high-end TVs alike. The three DisplayPort outputs give multi-monitor users maximum flexibility for productivity or sim-racing setups. The absence of USB-C is worth noting for anyone hoping to connect a VR headset or display via that interface — but since both cards share this limitation equally, it is not a differentiator.

This group is a tie in every respect. The iGame Ultra W OC and the Gaming Trio Plus offer identical port counts, types, and versions, so connectivity offers no basis for preferring one card over the other.

Underneath their respective coolers, these two cards are built on the exact same foundation: NVIDIA's Blackwell architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process with 45.6 billion transistors, running at a 300W TDP over a PCIe 5.0 interface. From a silicon and power delivery standpoint, they are identical — any differences in this group come down purely to physical dimensions.

The size gap is measurable but slim. The MSI Gaming Trio Plus is slightly larger at 338 mm wide versus the iGame Ultra W OC at 331 mm, with heights of 140 mm and 139.3 mm respectively — a difference of 7 mm in length and less than 1 mm in height. In practical terms, both are large, triple-slot-class cards, and the delta is unlikely to matter for most mid-tower or full-tower builds. That said, for users working with compact cases where clearance is tight, the iGame's marginally smaller footprint could be the deciding factor.

On the shared specs, the 300W TDP confirms that both cards draw the same amount of power under load, meaning neither has a thermal or efficiency advantage at the platform level. The slightly smaller dimensions give the iGame Ultra W OC a narrow edge in this group — not because the MSI is impractically large, but because in constrained builds, every millimeter counts.