Nvidia Reveals RTX 4060 Ti, 4060 with Prices Starting at $299

Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 Ti images and block diagram
(Image credit: Nvidia)
108

Nvidia revealed its plans for the upcoming RTX 4060-class graphics cards today. The RTX 40-series ranks at or near the top of our GPU benchmarks hierarchy and already includes several entrants in our list of the best graphics cards, with one major caveat: They're all expensive. That will change in a big way with the arrival of the RTX 4060 Ti 8GB, starting at $399 — which will directly take over from the existing RTX 3060 Ti. The RTX 4060 and RTX 4060 Ti 16GB meanwhile will arrive in July. The 16GB 4060 Ti will be priced at $499, so that's $100 extra for double the VRAM, but the RTX 4060 will come with 8GB for only $299. Tasty!

This is great news, as many people have been looking for more reasonably priced upgrades ever since the first Nvidia Ada Lovelace GPUs launched last October. It's also worth pointing out that four of the five top GPUs in the Steam Hardware Survey are from the xx60-class: GTX 1060, RTX 3060, RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, and RTX 2060. While the earlier models may have been priced at $200–$300 for the 1060, and $300–$350 for the 2060, it looks as though the 4060-class cards will mostly inherit the 3060-class pricing. That's probably about as good as we can expect given the current market and economic conditions.

Let's hit the specs table and see what we can expect from the new GPUs when they arrive.

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Nvidia 60-class GPU Specifications
Graphics Card RTX 4060 Ti RTX 4060 Ti 16GB RTX 4060 RTX 3060 Ti RTX 3060 RTX 2060 Super RTX 2060 GTX 1660 Super GTX 1060 6GB GTX 1060 3GB
Architecture AD106 AD106 AD107 GA104 GA106 TU106 TU106 TU116 GP106 GP106
Process Technology TSMC 4N TSMC 4N TSMC 4N Samsung 8N Samsung 8N TSMC 12FFN TSMC 12FFN TSMC 12FFN TSMC 16FFN TSMC 16FFN
Transistors (Billion) 22.9 22.9 18.9 17.4 12.0 10.8 10.8 6.6 4.4 4.4
Die size (mm^2) 187.8 187.8 158.7 392.5 276 445 445 284 200 200
SMs 34 34 24 38 28 34 30 22 10 9
GPU Cores (Shaders) 4352 4352 3072 4864 3584 2176 1920 1408 1280 1152
Tensor Cores 136 136 96 152 112 272 240 N/A N/A N/A
RT Cores 34 34 24 38 28 34 30 N/A N/A N/A
Boost Clock (MHz) 2535 2535 2460? 1665 1777 1650 1680 1785 1708 1708
VRAM Speed (Gbps) 18 18 17 14 15 14 14 14 8 8
VRAM (GB) 8 16 8 8 12 8 6 6 6 3
VRAM Bus Width 128 128 128 256 192 256 192 192 192 192
L2 Cache 32 32 24 4 3 4 3 1.5 1.5 1.5
ROPs 48 48 32 80 48 64 48 48 48 48
TMUs 136 136 96 152 112 136 120 88 80 72
TFLOPS FP32 (Boost) 22.1 22.1 15 16.2 12.7 7.2 6.5 5.0 4.4 3.9
TFLOPS FP16 (FP8) 177 (353) 177 (353) 121 (242) 130 (sparsity) 102 (sparsity) 57 52 10 N/A N/A
Bandwidth (GBps) 288 (554 effective) 288 (554 effective) 272 (453 effective) 448 360 448 336 336 192 192
TGP (watts) 160 160 115 220 170 175 160 125 120 120
Launch Date May 2023 Jul 2023 Jul 2023 Dec 2020 Feb 2021 Jul 2019 Jan 2019 Oct 2019 Jul 2016 Aug 2016
Launch Price $399 $499 $299 $399 $329 $399 $349 $229 $249-$299 $199
Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Jarred Walton
Senior Editor

Jarred Walton is a senior editor at Tom's Hardware focusing on everything GPU. He has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge '3D decelerators' to today's GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.

  • baboma
    >4060 Ti 16GB = $500, 4060 Ti 8GB = $400, 4060 8GB = $300

    It's what I expected, given the $600 4070 (12GB). My expectation extends to the forthcoming AMD midrange line-up, from 7800XT to 7600, ie that AMD will position them at price parity, but with better (rasterization) perf. 7800XT should be at $600 or maybe slightly less, and 7600 should be at $300.

    The only unknowns for me is how these will fare against their previous-gen counterparts, the 3060s and 6600s series. While Nvidia can make a case for 4060's better value prop, given the relative high price of the older parts, AMD will have a tougher sell to make, since the 6600 parts are substantially lower than MSRP.

    I'm assuming that THW has received all these parts and is just waiting for the embargo to lift to reveal perf benchmarks. When will that be, Jarred?

    Edit: Answering my own questions.

    >Nvidia has set the launch date for the RTX 4060 Ti 8GB card for May 24, and as usual you can expect reviews of the Founders Edition and non-overclocked models to go live the day before.
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    Keep in mind the silicon inside the 4060 is a 50-class die and the 4060ti is a 60-class die if you look at history.

    So, while this is arguably good, that caveat is still important to make: nVidia is giving you what is essentially the replacement of the 3050 as a 4060 for $300 base. Also, I still do not classify $300 as "budget" or "reasonable" for what is essentially the bottom of the line up.

    Let's see what AMD does now as it is an interesting move by nVidia.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • cknobman
    $500 for a 60 class card?
    Nvidia can kiss my grits!
    Reply
  • I think gamers should base their buying decision to get these 40-series SKU only on pure rasterization performance. DLLS3 makes the comparison less appealing, and it can also be slightly misleading.

    On top of that previous-gen RTX don't support DLLS3, only DLLS2. So for a fair comparison for an upgrade, just look at raw rasterization performance in games.
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    cknobman said:
    $500 for a 60 class card?
    Nvidia can kiss my grits!
    $400 for a 60-class card, $500 for double the VRAM version, $300 for the true (non-Ti) 60-class. 2060 Super was $400, 3060 Ti was $400. We've never had a non-vanilla 60-class for less than $400 from Nvidia in recent years (unless you count the 1660 series, which was the "dumbed down non-RTX" series). GTX 760 Ti would quality, but that's a decade ago and it was an OEM-only part.
    -Fran- said:
    Keep in mind the silicon inside the 4060 is a 50-class die and the 4060ti is a 60-class die if you look at history.
    That's a gross oversimplification. The 50-class and 60-class are volume parts, and so Nvidia opted to actually do a smaller die for the cost savings. There are a lot of similarities between AD106 and AD107.

    I don't know if AD107 has an x8 PCIe interface (like GA107 did), but it's still a 128-bit interface, same as AD106. L2 cache is smaller and it looks like it tops at out 24 SMs where AD106 tops out at 36 SMs. Using a harvested AD106 with part of the L2 cache disabled would give effectively identical performance (and honestly, that's even if AD107 "only" has an x8 PCIe link — now that multi-GPU is effectively dead, there's almost no benefit to x16 versus x8, particularly on mainstream parts).

    If you look at GA106 and GA107 as an example, GA106 had up to a 192-bit memory interface, more SMs, and an x16 PCIe link. So the main change that would truly matter, is the potentially wider bus. But with the larger L2 cache, even that doesn't really matter that much on Ada Lovelace GPUs.

    I thought it was pretty wild that Nvidia chose to do a separate die just to cut the size from 188 mm^2 down to 159 mm^2. That's a relatively minor shrink in size, and it speaks to both the costs of TSMC's 4N as well as the volumes Nvidia expects for the budget/mainstream GPUs. GA106 was 276 versus GA107 at 200 mm^2, so that's 38% larger on the previous generation, compared to 18% larger on this gen.
    Reply
  • edzieba
    cknobman said:
    $500 for a 60 class card?
    Nvidia can kiss my grits!
    $400, or an extra $100 "Make Number On Box Bigger" tax for those who eschew benchmarks in favour of gut feelings.
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    JarredWaltonGPU said:
    That's a gross oversimplification. The 50-class and 60-class are volume parts, and so Nvidia opted to actually do a smaller die for the cost savings. There are a lot of similarities between AD106 and AD107.

    I don't know if AD107 has an x8 PCIe interface (like GA107 did), but it's still a 128-bit interface, same as AD106. L2 cache is smaller and it looks like it tops at out 24 SMs where AD106 tops out at 36 SMs. Using a harvested AD106 with part of the L2 cache disabled would give effectively identical performance (and honestly, that's even if AD107 "only" has an x8 PCIe link — now that multi-GPU is effectively dead, there's almost no benefit to x16 versus x8, particularly on mainstream parts).

    If you look at GA106 and GA107 as an example, GA106 had up to a 192-bit memory interface, more SMs, and an x16 PCIe link. So the main change that would truly matter, is the potentially wider bus. But with the larger L2 cache, even that doesn't really matter that much on Ada Lovelace GPUs.

    I thought it was pretty wild that Nvidia chose to do a separate die just to cut the size from 188 mm^2 down to 159 mm^2. That's a relatively minor shrink in size, and it speaks to both the costs of TSMC's 4N as well as the volumes Nvidia expects for the budget/mainstream GPUs. GA106 was 276 versus GA107 at 200 mm^2, so that's 38% larger on the previous generation, compared to 18% larger on this gen.
    Fair points, but I'll be looking forward to what you find in your review of it :D

    Specially the FPS scaling across the different models compared to historical data.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • PlaneInTheSky
    3060 had 12GB for $299.
    4060 only has 8GB for $299.

    At $499, the 16GB 4060 Ti is out of reach for most consumers.

    Looks like PC gaming is set for another year of struggling to run console ports.
    Reply
  • hannibal
    Also if you compare the memory bandwide the 4060 is better than 3060 even it has narrover memory bus because it has so much bigger memory cache!
    So the memory bus is not the only thing you have to looks at. 453 Gbps in 4060 vs 360 Gbps in 3060. So 4060 has desent advantage in memory speed compared to previous gen!
    4060ti has even bigger cache and has 553 Gbps so allmost 80% faster memory than 3060 has and 3060ti has 448Gbps so even normal 4060 beat 3060ti memory speed!
    Reply
  • atomicWAR
    -Fran- said:
    Keep in mind the silicon inside the 4060 is a 50-class die and the 4060ti is a 60-class die if you look at history.
    JarredWaltonGPU said:
    That's a gross oversimplification. The 50-class and 60-class are volume parts, and so Nvidia opted to actually do a smaller die for the cost savings. There are a lot of similarities between AD106 and AD107.
    While it is an over simplification it not excatly without merit either. I do agree with you but I don't fully disagree with Fran either. And Nvidia, until now, hadn't done themselves any favor with the consumer base with bad pricing, low vram/memory buses on some models and the usual steep decline in performance gains going down the stack some how feels worse this gen. It left a lot if salty users out there. Point being her comment is hardly suprising in fact I have said similar myself...right wrong or otherwise (i am salty too lol). But I do look forward to your review. I hope the cards do well as finally Nvidia has done some decent pricing this gen.
    Reply