Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Review: 1080p Gaming for $399

Memory capacity and bus width can hamstring performance at higher resolutions.

Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Founders Edition photos and unboxing
(Image: © Tom's Hardware)

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

We've been working on this for a while, retesting all the GPUs on our new test PC using an Nvidia PCAT v2 device, and we're finally making the switch from the Powenetics hardware and software we've previously used. The benefit is that we're now using data from our full gaming suite, rather than just a couple of specific tests. The charts are the geometric mean across all 15 games, though we'll also have full tables showing the individual results — some games are more taxing than others, as you'd expect.

Our new testing approach also provides data on GPU clock speeds and temperatures (but not fan speeds), and we'll have separate charts for 1080p ultra, 1080p medium, 1440p ultra, and 4K ultra. Besides the power testing, we also check noise levels using an SPL meter. This is done at a distance of 10cm from in order to minimize noise pollution from other sources (like the CPU cooler).

Let's start with power consumption, with the RTX 4060 Ti having a rated 160W TGP (Total Graphics Power). On average, at 1080p ultra the Founders Edition consumed 139W. Dropping to medium settings while still at 1080p reduced the average power use a bit more, to 136W. Meanwhile, going up to 1440p and 4K ultra bumps the power use to 144W.

While the overall performance from the RTX 4060 Ti might not excite, the power efficiency is excellent. It's the lowest power draw of any of the GPUs that we included in our tests, and the only cards that use less power will be slower options like the RX 6600, 6500 XT, and 6400. Nvidia's GTX 16-series cards also use less power, but of course those are several years old and lack any of the modern RTX features, plus they're quite a bit slower than the 4060 Ti.

As you'll see below, average power use in the various games at our test settings ranged from a low of 104W (Cyberpunk 2077 at 4K, where it basically choked due to a lack of VRAM) to a high of 164W (quite a few games landed around that level, at 1440p and 4K).

Next up are the GPU clocks, and once again the RTX 4060 Ti sits at the top of the charts. While the official boost clock is 2535 MHz, in testing the card averaged close to 2.8 GHz — 2795/2793 MHz at 1080p medium/ultra, 2785 MHz at 1440p ultra, and 2780 MHz at 4K ultra.

Of course we're aggregating all of the results into a single number for these charts, but you can see the individual results further down the page. There's really not that wide of a range in our testing. Across all 60 tests, the highest GPU clock was 2820 MHz (Far Cry 6 at 1080p medium), while the lowest GPU clock was 2721 MHz (A Plague Take: Requiem at 4K ultra). If we drop the 1080p medium and 4K ultra results from the list, the clock range shrinks a bit to 2732–2805 MHz.

The overclocking results are also fun, with average clocks of over 3.0 GHz. That's pretty impressive for stock cooling!

Finally, temperatures also look really good on the RTX 4060 Ti Founders Edition. Worst-case, we saw a maximum of 65C in our tests, while less demanding games wer in the 48–52 degrees Celsius range. That's hardly surprising, as the RTX 4070 FE already did quite well, so having a lower TGP means the fans don't need to work as hard and temperatures still end up a bit lower.

The RTX 4060 Ti doesn't take the top spot in every chart — RX 6600 XT pulls ahead at 1080p/1440p ultra — but it's always in first or second place. Note also that the RX 6600 XT isn't a reference card; it's an ASRock Phantom Gaming triple-fan solution. That's pretty much overkill for a GPU that only uses around 150W, and the card's dimensions are substantially larger than the 4060 Ti FE.

Given what we saw in the power and temperature charts, you'd expect the RTX 4060 Ti Founders Edition to be pretty quiet. Still, it's good to have confirmation. We use a stress test running Metro Exodus for our noise testing, as it's one of the more power hungry games.

We check noise levels using an SPL (sound pressure level) meter placed 10cm from the card, with the mic aimed right at the center of one fan: the center fan if there are three fans, or the the right fan for two fans — or the only fan facing to the left of the card in the case of the RTX 4060 Ti Founders Edition. This helps minimize the impact of other noise sources like the fans on the CPU cooler. The noise floor of our test environment and equipment is around 31–32 dB(A).

After leaving Metro Exodus running for over 15 minutes, the RTX 4060 Ti Founders Edition had a fan speed of just 30% — the minimum before the fan just gets shut off — with a noise level of 38.8 dB(A). That's a bit quieter than the RTX 4070 FE, but basically within margin of error.

We also tested with a static fan speed of 75%, which caused the RTX 4060 Ti Founders Edition to generate 58.9 dB(A) of noise. Strangely, that's significantly louder than the RTX 4070 FE, so there are some differences, even if the cards otherwise look identical. Regardless, we don't expect the card would normally ever hit that level without overclocking, but it does give you some idea of what you can expect in warmer environments.

Here's the full rundown of all of our test results, including performance per watt and performance per dollar columns. We won't dig into the details much here, as we've already covered most of this information elsewhere. Still, the RTX 4060 Ti does quite well in the value and efficiency metrics. Note that we used the lowest priced card we could find online for the tables — for a reputable model from a reputable online site. You could find used cards on eBay for a lot less money in some cases, but buying a used graphics card has more associated risks.

Among Nvidia RTX GPUs, the RTX 4060 Ti currently represents the best overall value. That's hardly surprising, since it's faster than the previous generation at roughly the same price. AMD's RX 6600- and 6700-class GPUs do beat the 4060 Ti in FPS/$ in some cases, but it's relatively close. Of course, if you only look at the rasterization results, AMD does even better, while the ray tracing results favor the 4060 Ti. Same old story, in other words.

Another potentially good value is the Intel Arc A750, which can now be picked up for just $199.99 — half the price of the RTX 4060 Ti. It's not as efficient, and there are still occasional driver hiccups, but the price is hard to beat.

Jarred Walton

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.

  • lmcnabney
    3.5 stars for what is a fairly negative review.

    Who is the target for this product? A console will perform better for the same money and eliminate the cost of the rest of the computer.
    Reply
  • HKTacticblade
    RX 6800 16GB from previous gen is already better.
    Reply
  • DSzymborski
    lmcnabney said:
    3.5 stars for what is a fairly negative review.

    Who is the target for this product? A console will perform better for the same money and eliminate the cost of the rest of the computer.

    Presumably people who want a computer that can do the stuff a console can and still do the other things that a console doesn't do all that well.
    Reply
  • bourgeoisdude
    HKTacticblade said:
    RX 6800 16GB from previous gen is already better.
    It also costs more :)

    Seriously though, I keep waiting for a card around this price point to upgrade to, as I have the 1070 ti, but I keep getting disappointed. I am considering AMD as a protest to what I consider the NVIDIA name tax, but frankly I am skeptical that they will do much better with their 7600 (XT) or 7700 (XT). I play enough older games that I also lean away from Intel. I guess I'm just hanging on to Pascal for a bit longer.
    Reply
  • J_E_D_70
    WTH is going on. The $500 2070 Super 8GB from four (!!!) years ago crushes 1080p and is highly competent at 1440p. Two generations later a 4060ti should be equivalent to what... a 2080 or higher? Guess they really have hit a wall.
    Reply
  • dk382
    FYI, the professional/content creation portion of the review is for the 4070. Looks like you forgot to replace it with the 4060 Ti's data in the template.
    Reply
  • evdjj3j
    lmcnabney said:
    3.5 stars for what is a fairly negative review.

    Who is the target for this product? A console will perform better for the same money and eliminate the cost of the rest of the computer.
    I came here to say the same thing.

    "RTX 4060 Ti comes in just ahead of the RTX 3070 at 1080p, but falls behind the RTX 3060 Ti at 1440p and 4K."

    "Being faster than the RTX 3070 is at least something, but the lead is very slim, and the RTX 3060 Ti isn't far behind either. Gen on gen, we're looking at native performance that's only 13% faster with the RTX 4060 Ti."

    That's not 3 1/2 starts worthy.

    I'm getting the impression that Tom's doesn't want to bite the had that feeds it.
    Reply
  • peachpuff
    lmcnabney said:
    3.5 stars for what is a fairly negative review.
    Maybe it's out of 10 stars? 🤔
    Reply
  • bit_user
    dk382 said:
    FYI, the professional/content creation portion of the review is for the 4070. Looks like you forgot to replace it with the 4060 Ti's data in the template.
    I also noticed that, but the article text explains it:
    Note: We're still retesting some of the cards and so the ProViz and AI results aren't quite ready yet. Check back later today... the charts and text below are placeholders from the RTX 4070 launch.
    Reply
  • btmedic04
    So more or less 3070 performance for $100 less now, or 3070 performance with double the vram for the same launch price as the 3070 next month. Yeah no thanks. Insane that nvidia thinks they can charge essentially the same price on 3 year old performance
    Reply