Great comparison !! What I feel it's missing is productive GPU intensive software like Davinci Resolve Studio and Topaz Video AI (it uses AI tensor cores). This would get video editors attention ;)
yes but keep in mind there was also a big increase in watts from 1060 to 2060. i wouldnt really call an increase in wattage a generational improvement. you obviously get more fps with more watts.
@@nurag_s every generation is a 2 year jump. The gtx 1660 is not the sequel to the 1060, the gtx 16 series was within the same generation of the 20 series
@@theplayerofus319 the card itself is called RTX 2060, I wanted to talk about the name of the card, not the technique that the card allows to achieve, because precisely I said that the RTX have a significant improvement in performance compared to the GTX 😁
@@piranhax3396 no. The jump from the gtx 1080ti to the rtx 2080ti Was way smaller than from rtx 2080ti to rtx 3080ti. So i just wanted to say the namens has nothing to do with it. Its a normal generational upgrade just with added rt and dlss components
So we went from a ~40% improvement, to a ~20% improvement, to a ~13% improvement. Can’t wait to see the 5% higher frames for $150 more dollars on the 5060!! Seriously, I believe this is a ploy by Nvidia to sell their older graphics card stock because the older cards are better frames/dollar spent. Pathetic to see Nvidia taking this route.
it's not 40%, it's 80-100%, it's almost double the framerate or 200%, that is an increase of 100%... 40% improvement would be 30 to 42FPS but its 58 to 62
Yeah yeah, because it's so easy to get 40% performance uplifts all the time, it's not like there's the issue of diminishing returns, die and overall size, transistor density, thermal and power consumption constraints, massive changes in architecture needed, new tech, compatibility issues... nah, they just need to wish it into existence and poof! Magic happens! (not defending Ngreedia or any other company, just saying, keep your expectations low or prepare to be disappointed)
I mean, the MSRP is lower than both the 2060 and 3060 and on par with the 1060. Right now a 4060 is 20-30$ cheaper than what a 1060 would have cost me in 2019 at the time of the RTX 20 cards coming out. I remember how many complaints I saw that the 2060 is an overpriced junk, same with the 3060 on release. Then again, most of the cards people say are awesome were considered waste of money on release.
Por esa razón era que cuando salió la serie 20 yo solo deseaba la 2060 porque era una 1070 que hasta casi rendía una 1080 y con RayTracing ahora que estudio sistemas es muy buena incluso porque me ayuda en la programación gracias a la IA
The power consumption on 40 series is impressive. It may not be that much faster than 3060, but that’s still something. My 1660 is still holding up and will proibsbly upgrade when 5060 comes out in couple years
yup, since it's using the die and power consumption that is typically used on a 50 series card. It's essentially a 4050 mislabeled so they can justify charging $300. The desktop 4050 was slated to launch back in June. It's now October and they still haven't mentioned what happened to it, unless they are unofficially conceding that the 4060 was in fact the true 4050. They weren't able to get away with the 4070ti being called a 4080 12gb but they probably think the lower the stack you go, the less likely anyone will notice or care.
How crazy, does the 4060 have little difference in performance compared to the 3060 (except the consumption, which is lower), nvidia holding cards evolution (or would it be naming the cards wrong?)? Anyway, I'm going to stay on my 3060 a while longer, it's working great for me
the 40 series doesnt have that much of a performance increase over the 30 series but if you wanna max out settings and use dlss3 fg then you'll be able to play with raytracing in a games that you couldnt before but not worth it in general atm since not too many games support fg yet
xD man, for 3 frames more u pay around 100$ 3060 would have been a better deal for u... also i dont get you nvidia buyers.. ur sort of a cult.. amd is there too and in way better prices for hd monitors... unless u play at least 1440p or 4k... amd is better... nvidia is more for dlss and if u care rtx
@@PhantomLarry not necesarely, i just dont want to spend the most i can for most i can recive, i care more for value not performance! that said i do care about performance but at the same time i keep the value perspective in mind! i have had nvidia graphics cards in the past but these days amd seems no brainer to me!
Nice to see! Biggest win on the 40-serie over the 30-serie is not really the 'slightly more' frames, but it uses clearly Less Power!. On average around 50 Watts. Thats good I guess. Just hope on the 50-series they dont just put in more power to get more frames.... stick to the less power solutions please.
Unfortunately the 6 GB of VRAM are not enough for High/ultra textures in 1080p nowadays (textures Is the most important setting in my opinion) so it lose its meaning because It can't deliver a stable framerate with good textures. Something like an RX 6600 or a rtx 2060 super would be better (8 GB of VRAM are a must nowadays).
@@s0cks1985 yeah but this video Is about the 6 GB model. Other than that even the 12 GB model Is not worth It because nowadays the RX 6000 have very low prices in comoarisons to the rtx.
This really shows you how nVidia is playing with RTX 4000 Series. The Delta between RTX 3060 and RTX 4060 is actually Smallest Generational Gap of the 4 Cards. Because RTX 4060 is basically what should be called RTX 4050TI. Even worse with RTX 4070.
Nvidia started neglecting the 60 series cards last generation, focusing on corporate greed and deceptive marketing practices. The fact that were pinning a disguised "4060" against last generations mainstream option is beyond funny!
The 2060 and 3069 required 170 watts, while the 4060 and 1060 required less then 120 watts. That's what I wanted to see, if I get a.3060 will I need a new PSu.
The 128 bit bus is enough for me to steer clear of the 4060 / 4060 Ti especially if you care about using emulators where graphic memory bandwidth is important, the Yuzu dev's even put out a warning about this (google 4060 Yuzu). Nvidia knows they screwed up here which is why they're talking 512 bit bus for the higher end 50 series models.
Meh i dont care what yuzu means, i find the 4060 rtx totally valid. Ryujinx is not mention about 4060 which is fine. Yuzu can make a video or testing a benchmark vs the older card and then making a "sTaTeMEnt"
The 4060 has enough 128-bit bus, as this video proves. The gap between 4060 and 3060 is almost the same as between 2060 and 3060, I don't understand why everyone is whining. And plus 4060 has DLSS3. People threw a tantrum from scratch.
@@Aleksey-vd9oc While DLSS 3 has a frame generation (so a fake frames with optical flow) i could agree the other things! Yuzu Devs should making a Video Benchmark if the 4060 performs "worse" than the 3060 I dont know how people are still whining and went tantrum without proofs or other issues. The 4060 is really valid now
RTX 3060 is the new undisputed underdog champion after the legend GTX 1060! Nvidia should have never made this bad boy. I have one and I feel it will last till 2025! RIP RTX 4 series.
Comparing 4060 vs 3060 I can see why some are disappointed, but against 2060 improvement is quite significant, plus lower power consumption. The only good thing about 3060 is just more vram, but that's it. 4060 is superior in any other aspect.
I get everyone's issue with the little amount of uplift FPS wise from the 3060 to the 4060, there have certainly been far better jumps in 60 class GPUS. But I at least like the direction they've gone with power draw. It was a concern of mine with the Turing and Ampere based cards, though I'm sure I'm one of very few. As for the $300 price tag, that's not too bad either, I think the 1060 was about 249 or 299? even at 249, adjusted for modern inflation it's a fair price, and CHEAPER than both the 2060 and 3060 (if you actually could get one for msrp.) There are other things to like about the card other than FPS numbers.
no there are not, upgrading a GPU consists specifically in getting more performance, getting higher fps, getting more brute force, things like, watt consumption, software features, DLSS, ray-tracing, all these things should be secondary elements, the energy bill difference is inconspicuous when we're talking about a 100W, 80W difference on GPUs
@@evermartin3364 AHH I see your point it's not worth the upgrade if you already have a 3060 but as for me I'm only building my first ever pc and a 4060 ti being alot cheaper than a 306o for those of us that don't already have PC's and a looking to build one capable of handling everything well in 1080p 100+FPS high settings that won't send us into bankruptcy the 4060 was made for us, but I get why people who already have PC's with 3060 or something in that performance range are hating so much on the 4060 though you could always sell your graphics card and buy a 4060 you'll get a slight performance increase and you might even have money left over who knows
@@KyleC3577i mean, you're partly right, but even people that do not own a pc and its going to build their first one will be affected in the future, we're talking about the first nvidia generation that the 4070 ti gpu costs 800 dollars, and that same 4070 ti would cost 1199 and would be released as a 4080 if the community havent pressed nvidia, and the first generations that the final 70 gpus are the weakest comparing to the high end of its own generation, if things keeps going like this, the next 2-3 generations will have the most expensive final 60 gpus with the weakest performance comparing to the high end,
"power draw" except you can undervolt 3060 to draw less than 120W at those clock speeds. So the improvement is more or less just 15% at the same power with 4GB less VRAM.
As far as I'm concerned. I wish we could match the 3060 power consumption on the 4060 so we could get the performance jump we needed. That is the only way Nvidia can fix this mess.
1060 to 2060 was a very nice jump. Also 2060 did bring a lot of excellent new technologies like dlss, ray tracing, VRS, better dx 12 and vulkan support. 3060 and 4060 were awful.
The performance increase(compared to RTX 3000) of the xx80 and xx90 this series has been the highest compared to the whole lineup. There are videos out there showcasing this
@@pricetagcitrusyeah, it was a price jump of $1400 to $1600, and from $699 to $1299. Doesn't matter if it performs great, they're both insane, the 4090 is in a league of its own. But the price to performance is enough to push buyers away.
I've upgraded from 2060 to 4060, i think it's worth cuz at least i can use ray tracing at 1080p (60fps), but it was 390$ cuz in my country gpu prices hella expensive and buying 4060 at this price not bad it would be 450 or more can u imagine. Also i like how power consumption of the 4060 is almost same with 1060 but that price damn...
@@jordaniansniper934 all rtx has dlss 3.0. only the 40 series have frame gen. if you just game, 4060 may be better than 3060ti with frame gen, but without, 3060ti beats it by a bit. If you do content creation like adobe, 3060ti leaves it to dust. Including the 4060ti.
Concidering that from 1060 to 4060 we managed to only do 2x fps just shows you how much money they are trying to drain from you. the technology is so advanced they could give you so much more for such budget but for 10 years they sucked the 2060 and 3060 out of people until they got to 4060 which is only 2x performance from 1060... in my opinion every generation should 2x the last gen or its just plain stupid...
At the time, many people made fun of the people who bought the 2000 series. But coupled with the great drought of GPUs of 2021 and the meager improvements of some 4000 series, I think they got the last laugh.
My best advice to you is don't burn your money. Sure it's an upgrade, but rtx 4060 is the absolute worst when it comes to price to performance ratio. 128 bus width, 8 GB of VRAM in 2023 for $399 is outright a scam. I'll give you 3 choices, you can listen to me or... don't. Your money, do whatever. RTX 3060 - Cheaper, 12 GB of VRAM. AMD RX 6700 XT - Cheaper than RTX 3070, is on par with RTX 3070 in performance, currently the best budget king. RTX 4070 - Probably out of your budget but still, i would much rather recommend this than the 4060 any time. If you do productivity, chase RTX and DLSS, then go with Nvidia, but absolutely skip 4060, that is my advice.
@@gateopssss Is the RX 6700XT around the same price as 4060? Also, @4a4arA I'd also recommend the 3060TI. It provides a visible FPS difference over the 3060 in some games
The 30 to 40 jump is kinda pointless but from 20 to 40 makes a bunch of sense. You'll probably be using less power on the 40 as well. The 40 gens get a bunch of hate but jumping one generation is for the less than 1% that actually want to upgrade every couple of years. That being said... I'm really looking forward to the 60 series. Maybe 50.
2060 and above they doubled the wattage. Only now the 4060 & 4060Ti are extremely efficient. For instance, 1060 & 4060 consume the same power wattage but the performance is vast. In case I haven't had a 3060Ti or something happened to my GPU, I'd go to 4060Ti without a second thought, in spite all the negative comments about the performance. It performs very slightly better than a 3060Ti and in some cases it's a tie or even the 3060Ti very slightly better, but the efficiency of the 4060Ti is on the roof. Now, for my next GPU, no matter what, I'll simply go to 5060Ti. Those like me who always get the 3060 variations, only if you have older or God forbid, broke suddenly. Otherwise, wait for the 5060.
the jump from 1060 to 2060 is not impressive at all, because a lot more fps, but a lot more watts. the jump from 2060 to 3060 is kinda impressive, because same watts but more fps. the jump from 3060 to 4060 is most impressive, because a lot less watts but STILL more fps!
So the technical process has become much thinner, the watts consumed are technologies, you better focus on the gpu frequency - 4060 - 2700MHz, 3060 - 1800MHz, 50% of the frequency difference gives only 10-15% in performance.
En la generación rtx 4000 se enfocaron en lograr una alta eficiencia a costa de una poca mejora de fps, lo cual es algo bueno pero no muy atractivo para el consumidor.
gtx 960, 1060, 4060 all have tdp of around 110w rtx 2060, 3060 have tdp of 170w its very clear that nvidia slipped a higher tier card in there to compete with AMD and corrected it back now
@@krustyegirl7334 I'm saying that I wish that the design strategy for the RTX cards were all capable to provide 60+ FPS. I know NVIDIA is just milking customers for business. It's possible, they just don't want to do it
So, the 3060 is still the best investment. But, the 1080 Ti is the GOAT. If you're gonna buy a 40 series start with the 4070 as it is truly the 4060. Nvidia no longer has proper GPU progression. The 4070 is the 4060. The 4080 is the 4070 and there are no 4080 because the 4090 is pretty much the 4090. When the 4080 Ti comes out, perhaps it will be the true 4080. My 1080 Ti is the goat. I have a 3080 in my desktop and a 3060 in my laptop. For now, these two will suffice. When the 50 series come out, I'll upgrade to the 40 series. I always buy one generation below and stick to it for a while. No need to always be with the now. As we have seen, the now today sucks.
The 4050 is hands down the most impressive GPU, it is a lot more efficient than the 3060 while beating it by a bit. Nvidia should lower the price for this 4050 soon, and I'd buy it if they do, $300 is just too much for a 50-class GPU.
@@mikhmikhser вообще, то что 4060 жрёт порядка 100-120 вт и греется до 50-60° даёт большой потенциал для разгона. А также благодаря этому можно взять самый простой палит с 1 кулером, и всё равно всё будет в очень хороших рамках. У меня 3060 8гб с одним вентилятором греется до 70°, не выше, а тут вообще тихоня будет
You mean 4060? It's not in this video. You typed 50 3x. The 4060 actually performs MUCH worse than the 3060 in any game that utilizes a lot of VRAM, because the 4060 only has 8GB while the 3060 has 12GB. Seriously gets half of the framerate sometimes.
One thing not mentioned is that the 3060 has 12gb vram. So, it's much better in the long run than the 4060. They are very similar in performance, but if you over cap the 4060's 8gb vram by maxing out everything in Ultra with 4k, the 3060 will blow it out of the water in performance.
@@valentinberrelleza you need good base framerate for FG to even work properly. If you have 20 FPS, it will be shitty even with FG. You would need at least 50-60 FPS for it to do something.
The major problem I have with the 4060 is the 128bit bus. This bus config was used on the XX50 series cards which is probably why some people call the 4060 a mislabeled 4050. While the extra cache on the die is supposed to make up for the low bus speeds, it only happens in specific instances and not in general. If they would have went with a 192bit bus this card would be something to talk about in this price range. I would never upgrade a 30 series to a 40 series ... at the 60 level ... because of the bus. It really makes a difference. For instance, the 3060 8g is around 17% slower than the 3060 12g because the 3060 8g has a 128bit bus compared to the 3060 12g 192bit bus. Imagine the 4060 with a 192bit bus plus the extra cache. At this price point they would sell out in a heartbeat. Best to wait until the 5XXX cards come out and see what's up there.
4060 uses the 107 die too, which has been historically the die that was used for xx50 class cards. So this was actually supposed to be the 4050 that ngreedia is trying to upsell as a 4060
Nvidia needs to stop selling 60 class and above cards with 8GB of VRAM for the next generation. 1080p ultra has been bumping into vram issues for over a year now in some games. 12 or 16GB needs to be the new standard minimum.
People often complain about Nvidia realeasing a 50 series card as a 60's, but forget that AMD gave them no competition with the RX 7600. They can price whatever they want, people are still going to buy if the red team keeps falling behind. Aside from the small price difference and 8GB Vram limitation on both, the RTX 4060 still offers much better performance per power consuption and, access to DLSS 3 technology with frame generation, which has no equivalent from the red team either. I got a RX 6600, btw.
I upgraded from 1060-6 to 3060-12 and the only case when I got advantage about 2.44 times wus Unigine Superposition bench extreme profile. 1.88 time in High profile and from 1.67 in games. Ryzen 5 3600X and it can be the bottleneck.
u should compare the code names not the models like this GP106(gtx 1060) vs TU106(rtx 2060) vs GA106(rtx 3060) vs AD106(rtx 4060 ti), these are the real comparison not the models, then we will see the true improvements over generations
Man the 4060 looks bad in some cases. It should always be clearly better than the 3060. I hope Nvidia will offer better value with the 5000 series again. The 4000 series is just frustrating. The 4090 and 4080 are powerful, but still have terrible value.
The difference between 3060 and 4060 is a joke. NVIDIA was spoiled. With cards released in 4000 series plastation size. I have called this series garbage with the 4060 that came out with 8 gb ram bottleneck.
поверить не могу, что 1060 выдаëт такие результаты. я давно не вижу закономерности между количеством cuda-ядер и производительностью, потому что у 3060 их в три раза больше 😮
The 2060 puts in a respectable showing in. I loved my 1060, I'm sorry I sold though. I should have kept it as a back up when I bought the 3060. The 3060 puts in an admirable showing too.
I went from 1060 to 3060 and it's fine at the moment , if I was going to upgrade again I would go with the 4080 even know it's expensive for 1440p . The 3060 is fine at 1080 p in most games at 144 htrz . No point wasting money on a card unless it's going to do what you want it to do . Sure even the 3060 is lacking a bit at 1080 p in some regards . The novelty wheres off after a while , Iv used a 4090 before and it was smooth etc at 1440p . Definitely a noticeable difference in gaming on a beast as PC . I went back to mine at home and I was like well this is rather average , but not actually that bad at all . Getting a bit sick of video games lol .
@@mehDOGIESRATS2222 I bought a new 165 hz 2k monitor. I think the fps drop was about 50%. I think I'm avaraging around 100 fps in most games at med to high settings. Plenty enough for the next few years for me. I'm might get a socket 1700 cpu at some point to replace the i5 12400. It's on but I miss the i7 experience.
I have a 12400 also lol . Sucks about the fps , really need a beast to have high fps . My friends got a 7800 x3d , the fps are very good . But Id rather go with a intel lol . Are you running your games on a m.2 drive . Because the speed of your hard drive can effect your games I find . I need to buy one , when I put my PC together I thought it was a ssd , turned out to be a hard drive lol . So it's a bit shit . Motherboard fits a m.2 drive , haven't got round to buying one lol . Make sure you have xmp profile enabled for you ram speeds also in bios . You have to manually select the right speed also and save it . My flat doesn't even have his enabled the idiot rofl . And he plays on this huge 120 htrz 4 k tv lol . I tried to explain it to him one day .
@@mehDOGIESRATS2222 I'm running a gen 3 M.2 drive. I think the read speed is avout 4500m and the write is about 3500m.Thanks for the xmp tip i'l try that. Tbh, I haven't been to worried about the frame rate drop, I have a 2 monitor setup so I can swap at anytime! It's all good! 😁
@@longi625 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-WDzrq5IxBX4.html Might give you a few more fps lol . Another trick also is to turn the windows appearance down . Make sure you turn off all those windows apps etc and don't run steam or origin at the same time .
Looks like it's better to skip the next generation if you already were in the previous one and wait for the one that comes after, but looks like we're going to have to skip one more...
Underrated: The power consumption (W / FPS). Roughly the data for MS Flight simulator GTX 1060: 3,8 RTX 2060: 3,3 RTX 3060: 2,75 RTX 4060: 1,65 There was a big leap in efficiency from 3060 to 4060 you can see in all game comparisons.
The reduction in energy consumption is impressive. The 2060 performs 100% better than the 1060, but it increases consumption by 60 or 70%. The 3060 consumes the same as the 2060, but the 4060 manages to lower consumption to only 15% more than the 1060. A consumption of only 115w to achieve even better results than the 3060 at 170w is excellent news for devices like notebooks, where with a low TDP (which helps manage heat) you can achieve results almost at the same level as a desktop. Let’s think that a graphic in a notebook can hardly handle a TDP greater than 120 or 130w (because more would imply a larger battery, a bulkier charger, and a larger cooling system). In a 3060, 120w was greatly limiting the graphic, with a 4060 120w is enough to get the best performance.
I'm on GTX-760 (still!!!). Enough for anything, low or medium graphic, no problems so far. There are only three games I can't play: RDR2, BG3 and Cyberpank. Actually i can, but fps is too low.
