ASUS GeForce RTX 4060 Dual OC

[Drash]

@W1zzard

Sorry if I missed this - don't want to read every word of a 4060 review for so many reasons. I note you've changed the review game list for the 4060 reviews, hence the performance for the 6900XT (my card) has changed from an average of 176.7 fps in the last review posted with the old game set - 7600 Strix (June 16th), that is the one prior to the 4060 release, to 162.3 fps in the ASUS 4060 Dual today. However I can't find any data for how the 6900XT performs in the new games (Atomic Heat etc.) as they're not included in the 4060 graphs. Is this data available? Were just the new games benched on the 6900XT or were all with latest drivers, which would be new data as the original 6900XT review was 2021 iirc?

Cheers.

PS 4060 really is ... disappointing. There aren't bad cards just badly priced cards - we are getting shafted still.

 

[ModEl4]

Hi @W1zzard please correct the Maximum Overclock Comparison table regarding the Asus model (2645MHz), thanks!

 

[RedelZaVedno]

@W1zzard

Cudos for an honest review. I especially liked the conclusion: "A lot of people who just want to enjoy their games and feel like they are getting priced out of the PC gaming market."
Sadly very true. ATI/AMD and Ngreedia have forgotten their roots. They have decided that PC gaming has become a luxury activity, so either you pay a premium or beat it.
The only thing I as a consumer can do in this situation is to only buy 2nd hand or Intel as consoles are made by AMD so it's a no go as I'm unwilling to support greed in any way or form.

 

[dgianstefani]

It's not impressive though. The actual price comparison, right now, is between the 3060 Ti and the 4060 non-Ti.

You get 10-18% more performance with a 3060 Ti, at the cost of 18% less efficiency. The 'technological gains' are minimal considering the move from a bad samsung 8nm node to a cutting-edge 4nm TSMC node.

Neither of the low-mid range GPU's from either Nvidia or AMD have been compelling, mostly because of the prices. The 4060 should be a ~$250 card. The 7600 should be a ~$225 card. They bring little to the table at their current price points over the previous generation.

Ada is 5nm TSMC.

 

[Chrispy_]

So this is the best 4060 reviewed today and it's still a turd at $300.

The 7600 is overpriced at $249, but at least that's closer to the actual market value compared to existing new 3060 12G and 6600XT/6650XT.

What do you get at $300? Frame-gen at framerates too low to use, and superior raytracing, which at this tier is the difference between "don't use it" and "really don't use it"?

I'm unconvinced. The $180 RX6600 8GB is a great 8GB card. If you find a discount on a 6600XT/6650XT or it comes bundled with a game you want, get that. There's absolutely no reason to spend more than $250 on an 8GB card, and even then that's only if you're getting extras at $250. You can find a 6600XT used for $150 with ease. $180 for an uprated model in pristine condition. Why, why, why would you spend $300 on something in this performance class?!

 

[W1zzard]

Were just the new games benched on the 6900XT or were all with latest drivers, which would be new data as the original 6900XT review was 2021 iirc?

All cards were retested in all games using the newest drivers

Hi @W1zzard please correct the Maximum Overclock Comparison table regarding the Asus model (2645MHz), thanks!

2645 MHz is the actual measured average frequency, not the rated clock displayed in the GPU-Z screenshot. Same as for other cards, you can't really trust the rated clocks these days

 

[LuxZg]

Too bad reviews (and comments!) are all separate, and sadly I don't have time to go through it all...

But I did some "work" earlier this month to get some historical data, and now it's complete... (if anyone cares)

GTX 660 2GB 140$ 111W
GTX 760 2GB 210$ +23% 128W
GTX 960 2GB Jan 2015 200$ +10% 108W
GTX 1060 6GB Jul 2016 249$ +88% 116W
GTX 1660 6GB Mar 2019 220$ +23% 110W
RTX 2060 6GB Jan 2019 349$ +20% 164W
RTX 3060 12GB Feb 2021 330$ +22% 168W
RTX 4060 8GB Jun 2023 299$ +18% 131W

Now, I think this paints the last several years and all RTX generations just nicely. Gain ~20% for an extra ~30% price. And some still wonder why 1060/1660 was/is the most popular bunch of cards. 1060 almost doubled performance for 25% price increase. 1660 improved that a little again, but dropped price almost to previous levels.

And now we keep having to endure excuses of a product like these. Yeah, it's nice new shiny tech, power consumption back on track, but it's still an insult for "midrange". Hopefully it stays on shelves so it can drop 100$/€ in price in few months, same as other GPUs and CPUs went downhill this year. Maybe market gets back in line after all this. And maybe I'll stop skipping upgrades

To techpowerup and Wiz, good work, all I'd like is one summary article where all these models (and ones that get posted tomorrow) could be compared side by side, if only with first 2-3 and last ~10 pages of average perfomance/per dolar/power/noise/efficiency charts. If someone would want to pick one of these they'd need to open each article, note numbers, then compare, too much fuss. Just as an idea. And then comments could be pooled to that single place.

 

[evernessince]

I'm aware that I'm in the minority here, but I do actually value the wattage of this GPU. The price per performance is a completely different story though but at least unlike with the RX 7600 and putting aside VRAM capacity, you can't deny the impressive technological advance compared to the previous gen.

The die size of this GPU is just barley larger than an Apple M2. When put into perspective the power consumption of this card is not impressive, Nvidia is giving you a card between a 4030 and 4050 and calling it a 4060.

Honestly at this point it's just blows me away that both Nvidia and AMD can't release a clearly home run 250-300 usd product.....

Duopoloy. Why release good products when they can both release bad products customers have to buy anyways.

 

[Am*]

What an absolute hunk of crap from Ngreedia. Even the quantum leap from Samsung's fab to TSMC didn't spare this thing -- and even with 33% less VRAM, the 3060 matches it watt-for-watt in idle and multi-monitor use.

As for its performance -- good God, it's worse than garbage:

6 times slower than the 3060 in 1% lows, LMAO...those are some next gen gains right there!

...10% slower at 1440p 1% lows...

...and again, 10% slower than last gen.

Also I just checked the retailer listings for this card -- we have a whopping 5 variants to pre-order from here in the UK from one of the biggest retailers, in comparison to about 13-16 different versions of the 4070 that we had to choose from during launch. Even the salesmen of this hunk of crap have no faith in it and we've not even seen how few of each variant they will stock. It's game over for Ngreedia and I'll be happy to see them take the L on this entire generation.

 

[darkangel0504]

Too bad reviews (and comments!) are all separate, and sadly I don't have time to go through it all...

But I did some "work" earlier this month to get some historical data, and now it's complete... (if anyone cares)

GTX 660 2GB 140$ 111W
GTX 760 2GB 210$ +23% 128W
GTX 960 2GB Jan 2015 200$ +10% 108W
GTX 1060 6GB Jul 2016 249$ +88% 116W
GTX 1660 6GB Mar 2019 220$ +23% 110W
RTX 2060 6GB Jan 2019 349$ +20% 164W
RTX 3060 12GB Feb 2021 330$ +22% 168W
RTX 4060 8GB Jun 2023 299$ +18% 131W

Now, I think this paints the last several years and all RTX generations just nicely. Gain ~20% for an extra ~30% price. And some still wonder why 1060/1660 was/is the most popular bunch of cards. 1060 almost doubled performance for 25% price increase. 1660 improved that a little again, but dropped price almost to previous levels.

And now we keep having to endure excuses of a product like these. Yeah, it's nice new shiny tech, power consumption back on track, but it's still an insult for "midrange". Hopefully it stays on shelves so it can drop 100$/€ in price in few months, same as other GPUs and CPUs went downhill this year. Maybe market gets back in line after all this. And maybe I'll stop skipping upgrades

To techpowerup and Wiz, good work, all I'd like is one summary article where all these models (and ones that get posted tomorrow) could be compared side by side, if only with first 2-3 and last ~10 pages of average perfomance/per dolar/power/noise/efficiency charts. If someone would want to pick one of these they'd need to open each article, note numbers, then compare, too much fuss. Just as an idea. And then comments could be pooled to that single place.

this card is AD107, it could be RTX 4050 or 4050ti. 1050ti GP107 costs 139 usd at launch

 

[Broken Processor]

I was kinda expecting Asus to be on there best behaviour with this card but guess I was wrong they managed to make a garbage card skew even worse.

 

[ExcuseMeWtf]

"Best RTX 4060" ranks a little above "best dog turd"

 

[W1zzard]

To techpowerup and Wiz, good work, all I'd like is one summary article where all these models (and ones that get posted tomorrow) could be compared side by side, if only with first 2-3 and last ~10 pages of average perfomance/per dolar/power/noise/efficiency charts. If someone would want to pick one of these they'd need to open each article, note numbers, then compare, too much fuss. Just as an idea. And then comments could be pooled to that single place.

We'll have a video on YouTube later this week summarizing all 10 cards

 

[AnotherReader]

We'll have a video on YouTube later this week summarizing all 10 cards

As @LuxZg said, an article would be good for the more, mature (ahem) among us.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

We'll have a video on YouTube later this week summarizing all 10 cards

You should push the YT videos harder here, I've not seen one, might be my usual phone App use though.

 

[AnotherReader]

You should push the YT videos harder here, I've not seen one, might be my usual phone App use though.

Agreed. Many of us prefer the written word for its descriptive power and nuance, but for the younger people, video seems to be the the way to go.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Agreed. Many of us prefer the written word for its descriptive power and nuance, but for the younger people, video seems to be the the way to go.

I'd do both tbh

 

[RedBear]

"Given these high hardware prices I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of PC gamers start considering the various game consoles. Microsoft's Xbox Series S sells for $300, the Sony PS5 Digital for $400 - the price of just the graphics card. Both will give you a first-class gaming experience without shader compilation stutters and other PC port troubles. Gaming at 4K works well, and ray tracing is included in most titles. No doubt, the visual quality will be lower than on a high-end gaming PC, but it'll be good enough for a lot of people who just want to enjoy their games and feel like they are getting priced out of the PC gaming market."

Considering how Starfield is already locked at 30fps on console, and next generation consoles apparently could come out only in 2028, I'm somewhat inclined to think that many of those PC gamers will come to regret that choice. Personally I'm also somewhat surprised by this statement still remaining popular, prices for this class were technically even higher in 2019 (RTX 2060 sold for $349 at launch, which should equate to around $410 today); surely the generational gain isn't the same, RTX 2060 was around GTX 1070Ti performance whereas this thing is worse than an RTX 3060Ti, but in terms of entry price to PC gaming generational gain is not very relevant, people who have hardware that is little worse can simply keep their rigs untouched, people coming from Pascal era or older will still get a very large performance improvement for their money.

Kudos for the updated Intel GPUs benchmarks anyway, they make for an overall better picture of the current GPU market.

 

[N/A]

Nvidia is insane at this point. they took a perfectly good 3070 Ti and cut everything in half. added frame lagging tech to replace the missing half. Literally took those transistors that were CUda cores and Rops out and put tensor cores in. Clocked it by 50% and called it a day.

 

[80-watt Hamster]

It seems like there's some rose-colored glasses happening here. The bump from 3000-series is disappointing, but it's not exactly outside historical norms. Consider:

Model	+% vs. prev at 1080p	Watts (rated)	Price
760	20	170	250
960	10	120	200
1060	50	120	250
1660	20	120	219
2060	35*	160	350
3060 12GB	15	170	330
4060	15	115	300

*vs 1060

Observations:

• 960 was only 10% up on 760, but did so for $50 less and 50 fewer watts
• Pascal was a HUGE leap for a single generation, to a degree not seen before or since, enabling the massive jump from 960 to 1060
• The 2060 made 35% over the 1060, but at the cost of an extra $100 and 40 watts
• 4060 makes the same margin over the 3060 as that card does over the 2060, but does so at 2/3 the power

Conclusion: We're remembering how awesome Pascal was, and for some reason expecting that lighting to strike every generation. Yeah, the 4060 should cost $50 less than it does, but on a technical level it's not exactly the turd some are making it out to be.

 

[megaclite]

Nvidia is insane at this point. they took a perfectly good 3070 Ti and cut everything in half. added frame lagging tech to replace the missing half. Literally took those transistors that were CUda cores and Rops out and put tensor cores in. Clocked it by 50% and called it a day.

4050 class chip/bus/pcie/PCB presented as 4060
Nvidia has taken fraud to a new level

 

[N/A]

The physical slot done right and some of the gold plated contacts are missing probably not essential;

Conclusion: We're remembering how awesome Pascal was, and for some reason expecting that lighting to strike every generation. Yeah, the 4060 should cost $50 less than it does, but on a technical level it's not exactly the turd some are making it out to be.

1060 was 88% faster, and I would call that a solid 100%, triple the memory. I checked again. But no surprise there 960 was the exact half of 980, and it scaled pretty linearly.

Sorry it has to strike gold. otherwise who is going to bother for 15% increase.

 

[mechtech]

@W1zzard
Great review as always!!
A few questions
For witcher 3 - I’m assuming it’s not updated so benchmarks are consistent or would all the new updates matter??

any plans of a transistors/fps chart?

 

[Crackong]

We're remembering how awesome Pascal was, and for some reason expecting that lighting to strike every generation. Yeah, the 4060 should cost $50 less than it does, but on a technical level it's not exactly the turd some are making it out to be.

Is there a chart showing 1440p and 4k results?
Since all the reviews are showing the 4060 could lose to a 3060 in some games above 1080p, maybe we should put those in account before calling it 【Not a turd】
If a product is really technically superior in every aspects it should outperform the previous generation in every aspects.
If it is just outperforming the previous generation in some specific scenarios but loses in some, I would call it a sidegrade instead of an upgrade.

Not to mention it is consistently losing to the 6700XT, which is competitor's last generation price competitive offerings atm.

 

[N/A]

4060 is just a designation number in the product stack showing it's at the low end. Nothing more. it's not supposed to carry over from the last generation in the sense that it can even be slower than the predecessor. The rules are not set in stone. In fact there are no rules. Yeah I just say that but Nvidia makes the rules.

It's not a fraud. look at the prices of eggs. I can go out and buy 10 eggs and 500g of lentils and stay alive for 2 days and it would cost me double compared to a 2020 or 2018 can't remember exactly.

The point is why do you expect that $300 in 2023 will buy you the same kind of tier as in 2018, you are getting less amount, the eggs you are getting now for the same price are M not XL.