Indeed.
Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 Review
- Thread starter Steve
- Start date
- Status
maroon1
Posts: 184 +207
Consume much lower power and has more features than 7600 (like dlss). When you take this into account, it is better overall
BrwPCnrd87
Posts: 37 +47
Everyone always complains about the scores. Just stop scoring them and let the crappy results speak for themselves. lol.
$260 vs $300 makes it not better enough for the extra cost.
Imagine the 2060S owner who expected to get 2x the performance with another 60 level card two generations later.
maroon1
Posts: 184 +207
40 dollar is noting. You get more features and much lower power consumption with 4060..... In newer games (specially unreal engine 5), you will more likely use DLSS for those games because these games will to demanding at native.... And DLSS has image quality advantage over FSR
WhiteLeaff
Posts: 474 +857
The 7600 is around $240-250 on sale. I think that in the next games the 7600 will tend to stay above the 6700, there are some RDNA3 features that will still be explored
How is $40 nothing yet somewhat lower power is not? Most people don’t want to pay 15% more for the same performance.
FSR is worse but at 1080p DLSS is weak with obvious flaws though it’s a good option to have.
For those of you specifically interested in a 2060 vs 3060 vs 4060 comparison, here's how Steve's testing breaks down:
Compared to the 100% uplift that the 4070 had over the 2070 at 1080p, and 102% increase at 1440p, the 4060's 50-ish% increase over the 2060 is pretty disappointing. Taken in isolation, its overall performance isn't too bad at all, but compared to its predecessors, the RTX 4050...sorry, RTX 4060...isn't exactly what you'd call progress. Man, the mainstream sector at the moment is lost at sea.
Compared to the 100% uplift that the 4070 had over the 2070 at 1080p, and 102% increase at 1440p, the 4060's 50-ish% increase over the 2060 is pretty disappointing. Taken in isolation, its overall performance isn't too bad at all, but compared to its predecessors, the RTX 4050...sorry, RTX 4060...isn't exactly what you'd call progress. Man, the mainstream sector at the moment is lost at sea.
The 4060 and the 4060ti are the new low end and Nvidia has absolutely no interest on making this segment interesting, they just want to have a cheap manufacturing and good for laptops, as the 30 and 50-series were.
Everything lower than the 70 is just to fill spaces.
How to show "them"? Don't buy anything but older models or hold on a couple of years, that way:
- games will have to be optimized (good for everyone, specially the ones with Steam Deck and older 10xx or 20xx series);
- nvidia and AMD will be shown that milking the cow too much won't work.
Otherwise, start to save over 700€ to buy just a decent card...
bluetooth fairy
Posts: 235 +166
Please, consider to use 1% lows / street price metric in your diagrams. If it reflects real life experience better. Seems, such a metric even includes vram limiting factor.
kiwigraeme
Posts: 2,000 +1,410
If I was buying a 4060 in 2023 - I want to game at 1440p - most of us are not buying high refresh rate 1080p monitors
Where is the future in this card? - yes it bests a 3060 - so what you are paying a lot of money for a GPU with limited utility in you want to play AAA games going forward at 1440p - in 2026 this card will be sad and false economy - Give the punters a powerful sub $500 card Nvidia !!
Where is the future in this card? - yes it bests a 3060 - so what you are paying a lot of money for a GPU with limited utility in you want to play AAA games going forward at 1440p - in 2026 this card will be sad and false economy - Give the punters a powerful sub $500 card Nvidia !!
Nintenboy01
Posts: 309 +215
it's because other than the 4090, they're passing off lower tiers as the next tier up (like this thing should be a 4050 at best, and something like the 4070 Ti is more like a 4060 Ti)
Exactly that.
Just to show that it's not just the 4060 that's disappointing, here's how the 4060 Ti fares against the 2060 Super and 3060 Ti:
So the same improvement (~50%) over the 2060 Super as the 4060 has over the 2060, but the increase against the 3060 Ti is smaller than the 4060's over the 3060.
Gen-vs-gen (1080p)
2060 to 3060 = +27% avg
2060 Super to 3060 Ti = +42% avg
3060 to 4060 = +15% avg
3060 Ti to 4060 Ti = +9% avg
Gen-vs-gen (1440p)
2060 to 3060 = +38% avg
2060 Super to 3060 Ti = +43% avg
3060 to 4060 = +10% avg
3060 Ti to 4060 Ti = +6% avg
So the same improvement (~50%) over the 2060 Super as the 4060 has over the 2060, but the increase against the 3060 Ti is smaller than the 4060's over the 3060.
Gen-vs-gen (1080p)
2060 to 3060 = +27% avg
2060 Super to 3060 Ti = +42% avg
3060 to 4060 = +15% avg
3060 Ti to 4060 Ti = +9% avg
Gen-vs-gen (1440p)
2060 to 3060 = +38% avg
2060 Super to 3060 Ti = +43% avg
3060 to 4060 = +10% avg
3060 Ti to 4060 Ti = +6% avg
SilverCider
Posts: 89 +26
Impressive card, if it was a 4050 and priced accordingly.
hahahanoobs
Posts: 5,224 +3,076
The RTX 4060 only has to compete with the RX 7600. Period.
If you're not happy with 4060 performance, then focus your disappointment at AMD. Competition, right? Right?!
Gamers are always bringing up competition when it's convenient, but can't recognize it or the lack thereof. You threaten to go AMD, but look at the stats. Not happening.
You want Nvidia to do better, not AMD. You're happy with AMD doing the bare minimum, while you expect the moon from Nvidia. I saw the HUB poll with expectations of performance gen over gen. That B went up to 60%+! Are you high? 60%+ improvement gen over gen? Really. At every tier level? Because the poll didn't specify.
As a business, Nvidia is doing EXACTLY what they are supposed to do, and that's compete. And they are doing it. If you are REALLY upset.
Then REALLY go AMD this time. Stop crying wolf!
If you're not happy with 4060 performance, then focus your disappointment at AMD. Competition, right? Right?!
Gamers are always bringing up competition when it's convenient, but can't recognize it or the lack thereof. You threaten to go AMD, but look at the stats. Not happening.
You want Nvidia to do better, not AMD. You're happy with AMD doing the bare minimum, while you expect the moon from Nvidia. I saw the HUB poll with expectations of performance gen over gen. That B went up to 60%+! Are you high? 60%+ improvement gen over gen? Really. At every tier level? Because the poll didn't specify.
As a business, Nvidia is doing EXACTLY what they are supposed to do, and that's compete. And they are doing it. If you are REALLY upset.
Then REALLY go AMD this time. Stop crying wolf!
Well, everyone used to scream how the excellent performance of the 1080 Ti was a "mistake".Just to show that it's not just the 4060 that's disappointing, here's how the 4060 Ti fares against the 2060 Super and 3060 Ti:
View attachment 89096
So the same improvement (~50%) over the 2060 Super as the 4060 has over the 2060, but the increase against the 3060 Ti is smaller than the 4060's over the 3060.
Gen-vs-gen (1080p)
2060 to 3060 = +27% avg
2060 Super to 3060 Ti = +42% avg
3060 to 4060 = +15% avg
3060 Ti to 4060 Ti = +9% avg
Gen-vs-gen (1440p)
2060 to 3060 = +38% avg
2060 Super to 3060 Ti = +43% avg
3060 to 4060 = +10% avg
3060 Ti to 4060 Ti = +6% avg
Looks like Nvidia fixed that mistake.
So, Nvidia making horrible decisions and pricing is... IYO... AMD's fault? LOLOLOL
So AMD in your opinion:
- is guilty of incapacity of doing better
- is guilty of inability to be a good competition
Lolol, so Nvidia is a Saint and everything falls on AMD. Wow, are you a lawyer and used to makeup the "false fact" so that it seems a "true fact"? wow
Well, perhaps more the guilty is Intel, which is seeking GPUs but incapable of doing competition... perhaps Intel is the guilty for Nvidia making bad decisions for the customer!!!
True facts:
- Nvidia decides for themselves, they are guilty (and AMD and Intel)
- people that buy these underpowered overpriced cards are guilty, as were the ones buying cards like crazy for mining at whatever the price was (they are even more guilty)
But dlss. You just need to play the right games, games that support it.4060 is slower than 3070 ~30%, bwahahahah.
This is the first gen in a long time since the 60 series is not faster then older 70 series.
I was expecting something but not that bad. But what can you say about a AD107...
takaozo
Posts: 945 +1,479
Never used it more than 5 minutes and never will again. I rather go back to 1920x1080 or 1280x1024. I still have somewhere the old monitors. Or I just can play games in window mode at lower resolution.
And to be true, I was thinking last summer to wait for this card. Good thing I didn't and got another card a few months back after I saw the new cards released from both big players.
I'm good with buying used and got myself a nice toaster:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-geforce-rtx-3070-tuf-gaming-oc/
The only thing I hate about it is the +240W power draw. This made me ramp up the fans 100 RPM more than my usual fan curve. And also the fact that I can feel warm air coming out of the case.
But you can't have them all in the same time...
Buy an AC + solar panels, install them ( the AC above your PC ) and let the cold air cool down that Toaster. If you play during the day you'll save energy + feel cooler + your PC will make less noise and run better. Solution found.
takaozo
Posts: 945 +1,479
I already have AC. Solar panels ok. But MPPT + batteries + inverter need a separate room I don't have. This would raise my cost way more than $10K. AC will have to do for now.
I's a nice idea but didn't consider it when I build the house.
- Status
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
DARPA unleashes 20-foot autonomous robo-tank with glowing green eyes- Uncle Al replied
-
Need some games advice- Malone12 replied
