NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti and RTX 4060 Final Specs, Performance, and Prices Leaked

[LupintheIII]

You know if you have to explain the joke is not funny anymore, right? Anyway...

- GTX 1060 6GB, as fast as 980 and with 2GB more Vram (50% more), $300
- RTX 2060 6GB, slightly slower than 1080 and with 2GB less (25% less), $350
- RTX 3060 12GB, much slower (28% slower) than 2080 with 4GB more Vram (50% more), $330
- RTX 4060 8GB, much much slower (50% slower aka half the performance) than 3080 with 2GB less Vram (20% less), $300

Do you get the joke now?

They're faster than previous gen, draw less power and this time you will most likely be able to buy at around MSRP. Where, exactly, is the joke?

 

[3x0]

Yes I know, I am french, I'm very aware of the 20% VAT. The 4070 is sold at 649€ WITH VAT. Wich is way too close, compared to the 100$ difference that you will find between the two in the US. Unless you mean that they are going to increase the price of the 4070 as well?

The euro is not equal to the dollar anymore btw, it's stronger now.
View attachment 296502

Yup, you're right. Forgot nVidia started adjusting the euro prices, so it's not 500$=500 eur the way it was before.

 

[LupintheIII]

I think the 4070 12GB looks like an even better purchase for me at this point than the 4060Ti 16GB if the price is not that far off over here.

It really isn't for 650€ and 12GB of Vram

Especially that if you look at the graphs provided, there's barely any difference between 8 and 16GB.

Yes because they ave exact same specs outside Vram and more Vram doesn't make the GPU go faster, it just prevent it to get slower when it matter.

Hopefully in another 10-11 years people will get how Vram works.

 

[catulitechup]

Well bad times for huang and amd can put in troubles to nvidia if for example:

RX 6700XT 12GB MSI 320us newegg can put price at 300us

and

RX 6700 10GB Sapphire 280us newegg can put price at 250us

Respect RX 7600 are gpu for 200us or less

Good times for this greedy companies, thanks to last game benchmarks 8gb is officially low end

 

[Bomby569]

I used ~ to signify that it's going to be around that price. maybe 550 or 525, who knows, but definitely not 650€ since that's the price of the 4070 already.

from what we've seen nothing indicates from past experience it will be under 600€+

 

[Pumper]

from what we've seen nothing indicates from past experience it will be under 600€+

Cheapest 4070 on newegg is going for $599, cheapest 4070 in Germany is going for 599€. Stop looking at the crypto/covid prices driven by the strong USD vs. Euro and scalping retailers. The fuckers can't get rid of these GPUs so there's no way to hike the prices.

 

[Bomby569]

Cheapest 4070 on newegg is going for $599, cheapest 4070 in Germany is going for 599€. Stop looking at the crypto/covid prices driven by the strong USD vs. Euro and scalping retailers. The fuckers can't get rid of these GPUs so there's no way to hike the prices.

you can find some crazy deal on a ventus card with dual fans a small cooler idk (you pay for the lack of quality), but that's not their price. more like 650€

GigaByte GeForce RTX 4070 ab 573,99 € (April 2024 Preise) | Preisvergleich bei idealo.de

Bereits ab 573,99 € ✓ Große Shopvielfalt ✓ Testberichte & Meinungen ✓ | Jetzt GigaByte GeForce RTX 4070 günstig kaufen bei idealo.de

www.idealo.de

 

[playerlorenzo]

Seems only dust mites would be the only prospective consumers, as I said before.

Buy used, kids. Today’s GPU prices are way too crazy and unacceptable.

 

[Pumper]

you can find some crazy deal on a ventus card with dual fans a small cooler idk (you pay for the lack of quality), but that's not their price. more like 650€

GigaByte GeForce RTX 4070 ab 573,99 € (April 2024 Preise) | Preisvergleich bei idealo.de

Bereits ab 573,99 € ✓ Große Shopvielfalt ✓ Testberichte & Meinungen ✓ | Jetzt GigaByte GeForce RTX 4070 günstig kaufen bei idealo.de

www.idealo.de

So you are comparing dual fan 4070 in US vs. tripple fan 4070 in EU? That's a shit comparison.

4070 $599 vs. 4070 599€

 

[megaclite]

Nvidia has no bounds anymore, the whole lineup on purpose has wrong naming to scam you
3050 - GA106 128bit 8GB X8 250$
4060 - AD107 128bit 8GB X8 300$

2060s : 2019 - TU106 34sm - 8GB G6 - 445mm² - 256bit 448GB/s- PCIE3 x16 - 175W - 400$
3060ti: 2021 - GA104 38sm - 8GB G6 - 392mm² - 256bit 448GB/s - PCIE4 x16 - 200W 400$
4060Ti : 2023 - AD106 32sm - 8GB G6 - 190mm² - 128bit 228GB/s - PCIE4 x8 - 160W - 400$
4060ti is 10-15% faster than 3060ti for the same price, what a generational uplift!
while 4090 is 50-70% faster than 3090
So 40-series slogan: the lower tier card you buy - the less performance you'll get, and with 4060 you'll get NOTHING, because its xx50 class card!

Where is @GeForce_JacobF?

 

[ToTTenTranz]

Is it my impression, or does the 4060 Ti offer very little performance boost over the 3060 Ti, and the only titles with a substantial difference are the ones where DLSS3 frame generation is getting turned on?


So come FSR3, the practical difference between the 3060 Ti and 4060 Ti 8GB will be in the single-digit percentage points.

And if we compare the 3060 Ti on this graph with the values of the 4060 non-Ti on the previous one, we're getting a 3060 Ti running substantially faster than the 4060.

Nvidia is simply charging the same amount of money per FPS, as it did with the 3 year-old RTX30 generation.


Maybe for the RTX 4060 the chip makes more sense on laptops because of the decreased power consumption, but for semi-casual gamers there's little incentive to go with these cards over the cheaper and older ones.

 

[dyonoctis]

from what we've seen nothing indicates from past experience it will be under 600€+

Now we can put that debate to rest

 

[megaclite]

Thats exactly what i've talked about
Nvidia: we spend $200k on giveaways but you will not get fair price
bunch of pricks

 

[ToTTenTranz]

Why would anyone get a $500 / 550€ 4060 Ti over a similarly priced RX 6800XT that runs so much faster?

 

[Vayra86]

you can find some crazy deal on a ventus card with dual fans a small cooler idk (you pay for the lack of quality), but that's not their price. more like 650€

GigaByte GeForce RTX 4070 ab 573,99 € (April 2024 Preise) | Preisvergleich bei idealo.de

Bereits ab 573,99 € ✓ Große Shopvielfalt ✓ Testberichte & Meinungen ✓ | Jetzt GigaByte GeForce RTX 4070 günstig kaufen bei idealo.de

www.idealo.de

The NL situation:

Starting at 630. So yeah I think 650 is accurate.

Is it my impression, or does the 4060 Ti offer very little performance boost over the 3060 Ti, and the only titles with a substantial difference are the ones where DLSS3 frame generation is getting turned on?


So come FSR3, the practical difference between the 3060 Ti and 4060 Ti 8GB will be in the single-digit percentage points.

And if we compare the 3060 Ti on this graph with the values of the 4060 non-Ti on the previous one, we're getting a 3060 Ti running substantially faster than the 4060.

Nvidia is simply charging the same amount of money per FPS, as it did with the 3 year-old RTX30 generation.


Maybe for the RTX 4060 the chip makes more sense on laptops because of the decreased power consumption, but for semi-casual gamers there's little incentive to go with these cards over the cheaper and older ones.

They are selling DLSS3 on all cards except the 4090 basically. If you remove that, every single one below it is a really bad deal.

 

[Chrispy_]

Meh, both 8GB options are underwhelming against existing cards in the market, relying on barely-support software feature crutches to not look disappointing.

I *am* pleased about the power draw, but I'm not sure it's worth paying such a premium for.

 

[sLowEnd]

Is there any info on which 3060 they used for the charts? The original 12GB version, or the cut-down 8GB one?

 

[Chrispy_]

Why would anyone get a $500 / 550€ 4060 Ti over a similarly priced RX 6800XT that runs so much faster?

Playing devil's advocate; super-niche mITX 7L build in a teeny tiny case where the TDP matters more than anything else.
For the rest of us, no. The 6800XT is a far better buy.

 

[megaclite]

Is it my impression, or does the 4060 Ti offer very little performance boost over the 3060 Ti, and the only titles with a substantial difference are the ones where DLSS3 frame generation is getting turned on?

because its 15%

1066 to 2060s +78%
2060s to 3060ti +32%
3060ti to 4060ti +15%

next: 4060ti to 5060ti +7%

 

[tussinman]

The MSRP part. Almost 3 years after the 3070 was released, for the same price we get 16GB VRAM and DLSS3, with slightly better power consumption.
Or for the same price of the 3060Ti, we get the same amount of VRAM for 10-15% better performance.

3 years, let that sink in. If this was a mid-gen refresh 1 year after 30 series was released it might be acceptable, but this isn't what a 3 year cycle should bring to the table.

Reviewers should quote this quote, but they probably won't. Most reviewers will unfortunately just recommend this card instead of calling NVidia out.

 

[bug]

You know if you have to explain the joke is not funny anymore, right? Anyway...

- GTX 1060 6GB, as fast as 980 and with 2GB more Vram (50% more), $300
- RTX 2060 6GB, slightly slower than 1080 and with 2GB less (25% less), $350
- RTX 3060 12GB, much slower (28% slower) than 2080 with 4GB more Vram (50% more), $330
- RTX 4060 8GB, much much slower (50% slower aka half the performance) than 3080 with 2GB less Vram (20% less), $300

Do you get the joke now?

The high end is pretty messed up since Nvidia folded Titans in there (they're called x90 now).

So let's take a proper look at the mid range.

Card	MSRP	perf on top of previous gen
GTX 460	$230​
GTX 560	$200​	+18%​
GTX 660	$230​	+38%​
GTX 760	$250​	+6%​
GTX 960	$200​	+10%​
GTX 1060	$250​	+100%​
RTX 2060	$350​	+56%​
RTX 3060	$330​	+18%​
RTX 4060	$300​	+15% (rumored)​

As you can see, there is no imaginary trend being broken here. 1060 was special in that it came after TSMC's 20nm node failure which held back 960 quite a bit. 2060 that followed was more expensive, but only because it had a much bigger die (>400sq mm). 3060 got the die smaller again, but didn't lower the price much, because it was launched during the mining craze.

Also, those $230 that you would have spent on a GTX 460 in 2010 would translate to $320 today.

So I guess I'm not getting the joke because there isn't one.

NB1 Numbers for 560 and 660 may be a bit off, TPU doesn't have direct comparisons, other sites' reviews have become inaccessible. I tried my best.
NB2 I used non-Tis, because not every generation had one.

 

[3x0]

Thanks @bug for providing the table. Here's added info for more more clarity, I added performance improvement per month between releases. We've waited for the 4060 the longest out of all the previous generations and got the least perf improvement per month out of all (followed closely by the 960 by looking at the raw percentage). That is why it's important to add the time between releases.

Card	MSRP	perf on top of previous gen	perf improvement per month	Months between releases
GTX 460	$230
GTX 560	$200	+18%	1,80%​	10​
GTX 660	$230	+38%	2,38%​	16​
GTX 760	$250	+6%	0,67%​	9​
GTX 960	$200	+10%	0,55%​	18​
GTX 1060	$250	+100%	5,55%​	18​
RTX 2060	$350	+56%	3,11%​	18​
RTX 3060	$330	+18%	1,38%​	13​
RTX 4060	$300	+15%	0,53%​	28​

 

[bug]

@3x0 I'm not sure the time between actual card releases is the best indicator. Maybe the time taken to develop an entire generation (individual card releases are just points in time picked by marketing - Ada launches were delayed on purpose to clear Ampere inventory). Thanks for adding that, regardless.

 

[Vayra86]

The high end is pretty messed up since Nvidia folded Titans in there (they're called x90 now).

So let's take a proper look at the mid range.

Card	MSRP	perf on top of previous gen
GTX 460	$230​
GTX 560	$200​	+18%​
GTX 660	$230​	+38%​
GTX 760	$250​	+6%​
GTX 960	$200​	+10%​
GTX 1060	$250​	+100%​
RTX 2060	$350​	+56%​
RTX 3060	$330​	+18%​
RTX 4060	$300​	+15% (rumored)​

As you can see, there is no imaginary trend being broken here. 1060 was special in that it came after TSMC's 20nm node failure which held back 960 quite a bit. 2060 that followed was more expensive, but only because it had a much bigger die (>400sq mm). 3060 got the die smaller again, but didn't lower the price much, because it was launched during the mining craze.

Also, those $230 that you would have spent on a GTX 460 in 2010 would translate to $320 today.

So I guess I'm not getting the joke because there isn't one.

NB1 Numbers for 560 and 660 may be a bit off, TPU doesn't have direct comparisons, other sites' reviews have become inaccessible. I tried my best.
NB2 I used non-Tis, because not every generation had one.

Well actually, the 760 was a refresh and like the rest of Kepler 700 it gained some 5-10% on its 600 namesake, but it was not 'a cheaper 670' which is what it should've been, and the 960 was a total dud like the 760. Everybody bought a 970 instead, or bought a 750ti which was Maxwell-prerelease. 700 series was a pretty crappy deal altogether, unless you bought into the 780/ti or still had to come from Fermi. I had a 770 back then. It was just a cheaper 680.

If this table convinced you all is well and normal you need to get your head examined and fast. Just lining it up and adding percentages says nothing about the market around those cards, nor of how good or bad they were. I honestly don't know a single gamer that would pay for a 760 or a 960. They were utterly shite cards, and so is this 4060. A big box of nope. And that 560... didn't every budget minded gamer get a 560ti instead? I can't even find 560's in TPUs DB.

The 660, the 1060 and the 2060 were good x60's. The rest... myeah, if you are totally oblivious of what happens in GPU land, you dive into a Walmart and this is what they offer. Ignorance is bliss.

Having my share of experiences with x60 cards I can now safely say its that typical segment where 'cheap = expensive'. x60 is getting to sniff at the good side of gaming for a short while, and then coming up short. You like gaming enough to get a decent GPU. GET a decent GPU and x70 at the very least - thát is a rule of thumb that has held true to this day - Ampere excluded. They simply last that much longer, the end result in $$ over time is similar but you have a much better experience. And if you really can't spare the cash, get an x50ti instead. x60 is like that typical midranger 600-800 dollar laptop with all the bells and whistles, except you know the speakers will break within a year, the keyboard is shit and the mousepad barely functional, while the heat throttles every game into oblivion.

Seems only dust mites would be the only prospective consumers, as I said before.

Buy used, kids. Today’s GPU prices are way too crazy and unacceptable.

The problem is, the past few generations have been pretty weak, so used market even apart from mining and all is pretty f'ed up. People are still trying to get premium resale on Ampere for the same reason Nvidia does. Turing apart from a 2080ti is basically history if you want a meaningful jump. Pascal is too weak.

On the AMD side, you only have RDNA2 and its still selling like Ampere.

 

[bug]

Well actually, the 760 was a refresh and like the rest of Kepler 700 it gained some 5-10% on its 600 namesake, but it was not 'a cheaper 670' which is what it should've been, and the 960 was a total dud like the 760. Everybody bought a 970 instead, or bought a 750ti which was Maxwell-prerelease. 700 series was a pretty crappy deal altogether, unless you bought into the 780/ti or still had to come from Fermi. I had a 770 back then. It was just a cheaper 680.

If this table convinced you all is well and normal you need to get your head examined and fast. Just lining it up and adding percentages says nothing about the market around those cards, nor of how good or bad they were. I honestly don't know a single gamer that would pay for a 760 or a 960. They were utterly shite cards, and so is this 4060. A big box of nope. And that 560... didn't every budget minded gamer get a 560ti instead? I can't even find 560's in TPUs DB.

The 660, the 1060 and the 2060 were good x60's. The rest... myeah, if you are totally oblivious of what happens in GPU land, you dive into a Walmart and this is what they offer. Ignorance is bliss.

Having my share of experiences with x60 cards I can now safely say its that typical segment where 'cheap = expensive'. x60 is getting to sniff at the good side of gaming for a short while, and then coming up short. You like gaming enough to get a decent GPU. GET a decent GPU and x70 at the very least - thát is a rule of thumb that has held true to this day - Ampere excluded. They simply last that much longer, the end result in $$ over time is similar but you have a much better experience. And if you really can't spare the cash, get an x50ti instead. x60 is like that typical midranger 600-800 dollar laptop with all the bells and whistles, except you know the speakers will break within a year, the keyboard is shit and the mousepad barely functional, while the heat throttles every game into oblivion.

Well, if you read the post I was replying to, it said these 4060s are "a joke", because they don't follow some trend in the poster's mind. I posted those numbers to hopefully make it clear there isn't much of a trend to speak of. Some generations offered bigger performance jumps, some didn't. Pricing, for better or worse, is pretty much where it has always been. Like you said, in many cases buying the Ti version made more sense (I would have used Tis instead, but not every generations had them, so using the plain version was more straightforward). My own upgrade path was 260 -> 460Ti -> 660Ti -> 1060 (6GB).