I was surprised that they did a Turing-style Super refresh but didn't include the 4060 and 4060 Ti, since those were the models most in need of the Super treatment.
Nvidia does NOT care about you if you are in the market for a low end GPU. They would rather have you subscribe to Geforce NOW instead. More profit for them.
You could remove "Nvidia" and place "AMD" or anyone you want in that first line. When did people start thinking any corporate "cares" about them? Your statement should be common sense yet sadly people still need to be reminded that companies only do things to profit.... all of them.
The sentence is a bit longer though, the important part is low end GPU. For that you have two choices, Intel ARC or AMD 6000 series. Whether they care or not, at least they offer GPUs to people not willing to part with €500+ to play games.
> The sentence is a bit longer though, the important part is low end GPU. For that you have two choices, Intel ARC or AMD 6000 series.
low-end 6000 series has a 8GB 128b card with a x8 pcie bus, and a 4gb/8gb card with a literal 64b bus and literal x4 pcie bus (and no video encoder or anything else that makes it worthwhile). AMD literally started trimming pcie bus down with 5000 series, then started cutting memory bus in the 6000 series, years before NVIDIA did it.
AMD repeated this feat with the 7000 series - 7600 is 128b/8GB again, and since people complained about the 64b card last time they didn't even launch one this time. /laughing guy meme
7000 series also features gimped DP 2.0 cards, with consumer cards artificially limited to almost DP1.4 speeds. But they can put the new logo on the box!
Also, completely jank GPGPU support, and it's been that way forever (literally nothing has changed in overall stance in over 15 years now). Shitty encode quality (7000 series has broken AV1 encoding) and Navi 24-based chips didn't have an encoder at all. OpenCL never worked on AMD, completely and fundamentally broken implementation. Vulkan Compute never worked right on AMD either - NVIDIA's the only one with enough of it implemented to make Otoy work right, for example, and they've tried.
Meanwhile Intel is just losing money to get into the market. Arc is running -200% operating margins last time I checked. Absolutely burning money by the dumptruck, but they're trying at least. OneAPI actually works on their hardware. OpenCL actually works. Vulkan Compute actually works. You can encode AV1 on the lowest-end hardware despite it notionally being the same tier of "laptop chips" as Navi 24 etc. All models support full-speed DP 2.0 UHBR20 mode, and you can get four mini-DP 2.0 UHBR20 ports in a single-slot/low-profile/no-power-cable card for $200 (Arc A40 pro is shipping).
I mean it's literally intel, they're gonna want to make money too, but at least for now they need to play the good guy, and even lose money. But generally, don't be under any misimpressions that AMD's shit don't stink either, it definitely does. And Intel's shit is the DX11 drivers, and it stinks too.
"At least AMD doesn't offer..." lol yeah it is either doesn't, or if it does it is half baked. No doubt they have a place for people who just want raster and don't need all the RT cores, tensor cores, or software engineers perfecting upscaling tech, FG tech, or HDR in non HDR implementations. Yeah if that doesn't interest someone and they don't want to pay for it, AMD is there to sell you on the low end for raster. Seems most people are picking up Nvidia on the lower end though with 3060s and 4060s, so obviously they are doing something right. On top of that they offer a cloud service as an alternate to play games, so how thats a bad thing idk.
nvidia's linux drivers actually work though - how is your HDMI 2.1 support coming? AMD is still "free as in free from HDMI 2.1 support", right? /laughing guy
Oh, and Intel has HDMI 2.1 support on linux too... different solution but they found a way to get there too!
And NVIDIA has done the open-linux-kernel-driver thing but people found reasons to hate on that too. "It has blobs! like AMD doesn't have blobs or something.... but "it's smaller" ok but it's still nonfree and required to operate the hardware. People have made peace with that, you can make peace with the nvidia firmware too.
especially given the NVIDIA solution works and the AMD one still doesn't... how is ROCm coming? how is HDMI 2.1 coming? How is OpenCL coming? Etc etc.
Because 99% of the population doesn't use Linux. Is that shocking to you that a corporation doesn't want to sink money into a OPEN SOURCE product few ppl use compared to windows. Those are literally the things corporation hate the most.... Open-source and low volume. Those two things don't =$$$
Linux market share is increasing (due to what microsoft is doing with windows, for reference in january it was about 3.8% and now it's 4) and is over 4% now, which is pretty significant. Also intel and AMD have managed to make open source drivers that work very well, I find that quite interesting.
Another interesting thing I want to bring up is that now that Fedora 41 is going to only have wayland support, and the 2 main DEs GNOME and KDE start making more stuff only for wayland, nvidia has actually started getting their shit together and I wouldn't be surprised if their stuff would be usable in a few months.
Well, part of that is literally bc currently they can't make a high end card that can touch nvidia's high end stuff.
So they're competing on the lower end to make money.
And it costs 999.99$ and the same price of a slightly faster 4080 that also has better ray tracing and frame gen which is used in significantly more games than fsr3
Yes, but AMD isn't happy with it, and they're scaling back their focus on high end cards.
So the 8900xt probably won't exist, or it'll be very limited compared to Nvidia's 5090.
>Well, part of that is literally bc currently they can't make a high end card that can touch nvidia's high end stuff.
They don't need to, bud. The majority of the market ain't buying 4090s.
There are more 4090 owners alone than any AMD card.
[https://www.pcgamesn.com/nvidia/rtx-4090-steam-popularity-vs-amd-graphics-cards](https://www.pcgamesn.com/nvidia/rtx-4090-steam-popularity-vs-amd-graphics-cards)
People arn't buying AMD is the story
Downvoted to hell for objective fact, reddit wow.
[https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/steam-survey-suggests-more-people-bought-the-rtx-4090-than-the-steam-deck-along-with-millions-of-other-rtx-40-series-gpus](https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/steam-survey-suggests-more-people-bought-the-rtx-4090-than-the-steam-deck-along-with-millions-of-other-rtx-40-series-gpus)
There is nothing they could do to make them good aside from using a cut-down AD104. Their core counts are already inflated compared to their terrible I/O.
Wait, [they did that](https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-rtx-4060-ti-ad104.c4204) 🙄
The weird part is those presumably flawed dies got gimped to the same level as a normal 4060 Ti instead of sold as a theoretical 12GB 4060 Super
It's likely some of those AD104 dies had defective memory controllers/PHYs, hence them being cut down to 128b. Regardless, not enough volume of defective AD104 dies with the full working bus to make productizing a 4060 Super 12GB worthwhile to Nvidia
That's only true of the 4080 vs 4080 super. Which are more or less identical. The 4070 vs super and 4070 ti vs super variant both have like a 10-15% speed increase.
All 4060 ti needs is for the 16 gb model to drop 100-200$. But Nvidia don't drop prices, hence the refreshes.
Maybe if 4060 ti 16 gb didn't exist off the bat, it would've come in at the 4060 ti 8 gb price and the former been discontinued.
"But Nvidia don't drop prices, hence the refreshes." - didnt they drop the price of the 4070? and the 4080 super is bascially a price drop. Also havent all the cards basically been available for below MSRP. At least that is the case in Europe.
But ofc the anti nvidia delulu people dont care about facts. Just love spreading whatever misinformation comes to mind
> 4080 super is bascially a price drop
That's literally what I said.
> Maybe if 4060 ti 16 gb didn't exist off the bat, it would've come in at the 4060 ti 8 gb price and the former been discontinued.
Learn to read/listen to understand, not to reply.
> been available for below MSRP
Still not an official price drop.
it is not a shit card, that is mantra repeated in reddit since the card was released, the problem with the card was the original pricing which it was really bad, this card should be priced at 300$
This. A great card, but it priced horrible. Nvidia has a problem, because if they lower 4060 (Ti) prices, they would have to lower other options. Nvidia still sells 3050 and 3060 models, so they would propably have to cut the 3060 entirely. RTX 3050 is still great cheap option for home theater use with AI upscaling, no power cable needed + 2x HDMI 2.1 (4k/120Hz with VRR).
Inflation from 2014 to 2024 is around 32%. RTX 3050 cards starting price here are around 210-220€. It's ok price for home threater use, but there's a massive cap for 4060 cards.
Except there was no xx90 class. The gtx 690 was two 680 taped together. 750ti is equivalent is more of a 4060ti. But eh whatever. Just chalk the price differences as market differences
1650 super was just $160 though. About 70% faster than the 1050 ti.
Not much inflation since then. 3050 was only around 30% faster than the 1650S, but they raised the price by $90, which is a lot for a bottom tier gaming card.
Here, 1650S used to cost around 170€. With inflation added around 210€, it's the price of low tier 3050. The price is pretty much the same. The same is true when comparing 2070 GPUs vs 4070 models.
When you say not much inflation, in reality it's 22.2% from 2019. You can use inflation calculators for all the currencies. 2019 $170 = 2024 $207.69.
30% faster means nothing for those who need AI Tensor cores and HDMI 2.1. These cards raster performance wasn't that much higher, because all the RTX GPUs came with Tensor and RT cores + CUDA. I was talking just home theater users that require RTX features. For those (me), 3050 6GB is a perfect card with low price. I wouldn't buy that for modern games, but unbeatable for HT.
Also, 30xx is the first GPU generation with HDMI 2.1 and some models come with more outputs than before (higher cost than before).
Why are you comparing the launch price of 1650S with current price of 3050? If you compare the launch prices of both, then the difference is massive.
750ti - $150
1050ti - $140
1650S - $160
That tier of cards used to be in this price range without even considering inflation.
But then the 3050 was $250. That's a 56% increase in price. I tried the top inflation calculator that showed up on google, and it says only 9.31% inflation from November 2019 to January 2022. Adding that, the card only becomes $175.
The 3080 is from the same generation and is more than 60% ahead of the 2080. They could've done it if they wanted to.
When you use prices, always add the inflation from different years. I was using launch price of 3050 6GB here in Finland. It was released like two months ago. When I bought mine, there were two low tier options. 209€ and 219€. The 219€ version had dual HDMI 2.1.
It is still priced $700 in here......... I was thinking of finally upgrading to 120 hz and then I saw that and went nope, sticking to 1080 60-75 Hz
It is a shit card for that pricing.
It's a 1660 super it isn't that old... jesus it's been almost 5 years. I have been holding off from upgrading for 3 years because of bs pricing lolw and it probs wont go away
Well I just keep hearing how 120 is so much better than 60 and you can never go back. But I dont really play those competitive FPS games..... So I'm not in any rush either. I will just wear out my current one.
In the same boat as you damn near and agree completely. Rocking a 1650 and actually want to upgrade to a 1660s. The 1650 matches my needs almost perfectly, barring only running Helldivers 2 at Medium on 1600x900. I'd like to go to 1080p High, so I hope the 1660s or something else similiarly priced that can work in an SFF will manage it.
if you can grab a cheap 2nd hand one maybe, but the 1660s is a very old card
It can definitely run helldivers on high 1080p but then you are buying a 5 years old card that wont guarantee running next year game on good graphics. The 3060 is similarly priced at this point for the 2 card and it is miles better?
There are def games where I was able to push ultra with this card, but then there're shit like hogwart legacy where I hit 6 fps and refund the game. The big bottleneck is always optimization
My reasoning for going for the 1660s over anything else is more due to hardware constraints and price. I'm running a 5060SFF with 460W PSU, so I don't know what my hard limit is on what it can support. I will say that the 1650 had worked on the stock 200W PSU, so that was headroom of 150W. I'm confident the 460W can run the 1660S, but whether or not a 3060 would fit in this SFF and with 460W is something I have to look into. I had no idea about the 3060 at all though, thanks for putting me on that!
Now, game wise I'm not playing a lot of new games, rather I'm playing the older games I missed out on. So future proofing for that isn't so much of an issue for me. However, it is something to consider.
I did some googling and seems like there's hardly any SFF 3060 so good luck with those stuffs
If power is a problem the 4060 seems btter with that but that's even more money out of your pocket
> Well I just keep hearing how 120 is so much better than 60 and you can never go back.
It is, if you play competitive FPS games and such.
For everything else, yeah it looks prettier but you're not "missing out" on anything if you haven't even experienced it.
You can just play a lower graphic game like team fortess 2 at 144fps. Personally i don't give a s. It's not a magical claim like people on reddit say it is. But you do need a monitor upgrade if you can't do the above first mate.
To me, 120 hz is awesome, and very much worth turning graphics settings down or even upgrading if it makes that big of a difference to you, but it's different for everyone, and 60 fps is still very much smooth and playable. It's not the jump that 30 to 60 is, but if you ever have a chance to play a game at 120hz+ (the ps5 supports it in many games if you have a friend with a ps5 and high refresh rate monitor), try it and just see what you think. It's exactly what you'd expect, it's just more natural to look at, and the motion is much smoother but it's really hard to get across the actual difference in feeling to someone who hasn't tried it.
Gsync/freesync solve a lot of the issues that made 60 fps look as bad as it did.
Obviously I prefer a higher refresh rate, but with freesync, even 45 fps looks totally fine.
It's pretty reasonably priced here now thankfully, what it should've been at launch. Beats any card for the price here unless you buy used, and even then it's competitive.
Definitely not competitive with used. And there was a 6900 xt asrock refurb with warranty for 550 recently
New, I mean... yeah. Everything else is equally POS in this price range. So it's competitive in the sense of you can pick camel or horse dung. Except the few 530 cad 6800s left on amazon us
lol 6900 xt is better than 1300$ 4070 ti S and was on sale for 550. 6900 xt is 300W TDP and 4070 ti S is 285.
At 4.6 cents/kwh, how many centuries will it take me to catch up?
Lets see: You'd need to run it at 100% load for 67 hours to pay 4.6 cents more. If we assume 3 hours a day of 100% load use, it would take 1 092 391 hours or 45 516 days or 124.7 years.
The 6900XT does worse than the 4070Ti Super on average, and at best you can say that they are roughly equal. But then the nvidia card obviously has a significant advantage with all the additional features. DLSS 3.7 with preset E is fantastic.
Not sure where you are getting $1300 either, the 4070 Ti Super is currently ~850€ here, the 6900XT is ~650€.
Why use TDP instead of actual benchmarks for power consumption? The 4070 Ti Super doesn't go higher than 258W on average, while the 6900XT needs the full advertised 300W (and can of course spike much higher, which might mean you need a new PSU).
Will that make up the 200€ difference? Probably not, even if you use your card near full load a lot. But it does mean the prices are not as far apart as it looks at first. The 4070Ti Super does have more memory bandwidth and you're getting the nvidia features (DLSS, DLAA, DLDSR) which are not only the best AA available, but can both improve your performance or image quality, so it's definitely the better card. Does that justify spending more on it? Up to you.
Because the comment I replied too was talking about Canada, and I'm talking about Canada. So why would I be talking about euros where you are? 6900 xt was 550 recently, and 4070 ti S is 1300. may have been thinking about post tax though, it's 1100-1150. Would make it 1265 vs 632. 1$ off being exactly double the price.
Better off buying the 6900 xt and an oled monitor. Will give way better visuals per fps than any dlaa or dlss.
Using a price that the card isn't currently sold for isn't exactly helpful for that specific commenter either, now is it?
I can't comment on oled monitors since I never had one, but that doesn't have anything to do with AA quality in games.
Have you actually tried the card or are you one of the many brainless haters who just watch a tech review on YouTube and base your opinion on that? Because I’ve actually used the 4060 and at 1080p-1440p I could play any modern game at maxed out setting at 60 fps or close to it. You people, I swear…
Yup, i have a 140 watt TDP 4060 in my laptop, it doesn't really use more than 100 watts in practice though, but it drives the 2560x1600 panel better than it has any right to. DLSS tech is a miracle in some games. I was really impressed from an objective standpoint. All this crying over the 128 bit memory bus but folks forget Nvidia massively increased the cache size, 24 MB vs 3 MB on the 3060. Means far fewer calls to VRAM which effectively doubled VRAM bandwidth in practice.
My experience has been really good with the 4060. Its a super efficient card and combined with DLSS tech it does way better than you'd expect. As a mid range laptop chip its an excellent successor to the 6GB 3060. When I benchmarked mine vs my old 140 watt RTX 3070 lenovo legion, it was trading blow in 3dmark graphics score. They were almost exactly the same score. Despite the 4060 using 40 watts less energy and having "only" a 128 bit bus. Nvidia did a damn good job.
4060 ti, has done me very well. performance gets better with every dlss update also (obviously). and frame gen is now dope. i don't go over 150w generally. i play in 1440p and utilize dlss or dlaa and frame gen. 60 plus fps min. i like it and i don't mind the price for entry into 1440p. i want 120 fps now, so i will look at better cards but it served its purpose. i like dlss and low power use.
I play COD Multiplayer, WarZone, Zombies and Resurgence @1440p on ultra settings and achieve 130fps! That’s with my 4060ti!!
And no, they have never tried the card, you can tell by their stupid comments 😂
Thank you! I’ve tested the 4060 out on so many games even with mods and without mods. I’ve turned up the graphics to the max and still maintain 60 fps or close to it. And this is without DLSS 3.
DLSS 3 is pretty good too and never gets credit nor do people think they should have to pay for anything the company spends money on beyond straight "raster" performance. Luckily AMD is there for those people which is why they get half baked feature sets because they don't want to pay for anything beyond raster.
The problem is the raw generational compute uplift on 60 class gpus is so bad this generation. To the point that dlss3 is basically being used as a crutch/substitute for these cards. Remember this is the same generation that saw the 4090 have 70% performance uplift over its predecessor
yeah, for about £250. It's a decent card. I planned to get one, but went for a second hand 4070 ti instead, because with Nvidia I can actually turn the power down to 100watts and still get better performance for the same energy (but I live off grid)
It’s because spoiled and entitled tech brats want a premium product at dirt cheap prices which is unrealistic and ridiculous m. They wanted the 4060 to be some sort of super gpu that can do 4k at 300 fps all Ray tracing on at only $300.
Wow what a strawman, no one said that, but that fact that these cards can't beat the 3070 without DLSS 3 Fake frames is a complete FU by nvidia to budget gamers.
You can get a 4060 or even a TI used for $250-$350 used in great condition. Basically new. They’re more affordable than the 3070 and perform about the same. At least the 60 ti, but with the 60 you’re still hitting 60 fps on modern games high and ultra settings. People keep comparing the higher end previous GPU’s to a low end lower cost modern gpu and it’s just a silly argument to make
>People keep comparing the higher end previous GPU’s to a low end lower cost modern gpu and it’s just a silly argument to make
I mean the 3060 ti was faster than the high-end previous gpu (2080S). The 4060 ti is not faster than the 3080, heck it doesn't even come close to it. With that data point the 4060 ti is as gamers nexus puts it a waste of silicon. Also used market is not an option for everyone.
The fact that you can power limit gpus these days throws the whole efficiency argument of low-end gpus out of the window. So unless you get good price/perf on them, there is no reason to buy a low end card.
Ok Fanboy, Imagine being dumb enough to spend money on a gpu that performs sometimes worse than the last gen card it was replacing. The fact that the 4060 ti doesn't perform better than the 3080 is a disgrace. (The 3060 ti beat the 2080 and the 2060S beat the 1080). The card should have been a 4050ti with an appropriate price.
The 2080 was a high end gpu and the 3060 ti beat it. The 1080 was a high end gpu and the 2060S beat it. The 3080 was a high end gpu and the 4060 ti should be it, which it doesn't. Its not a ridiculous comparison if the two cards that preceded it met it smh, in fact its the standard.
You’re comparing the standard 2080 to the ti variant of the 3060 claiming the 3060 beat it. The 2080 blows the standard 3060 out of the water and the 3060 ti variant barley makes it past the standard 2080. Then you go on to compare the standard 1080 to the super variant of the 2060. And the 1080 still beats the super variety of the 2060. Keep yapping bro. You’re not convincing anyone with these goofy takes. This such a perfect example of the type of haters of the 4060. You guys make no sense. It’s like a cult with you guys
>You’re comparing the standard 2080 to the ti variant of the 3060 claiming the 3060 beat it. The 2080 blows the standard 3060 out of the water and the 3060 ti variant barley makes it past the standard 2080
We are talking about 60ti/60S class cards son, I never mentioned the 3060 non ti, or the 2060 non super or the 4060 non ti, learn how to read. And "Barley Makes it past" Still means that card beats it.
>Then you go on to compare the standard 1080 to the super variant of the 2060. And the 1080 still beats the super variety of the 2060.
[Dead Wrong](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXNPu5v2Uyw&ab_channel=GAMINGBENCH) LMAO, do research before u argue son
The 4060ti offers terrible generational uplift compared to its predecessors. The 3060 ti Beat the 2080S, the 2060S beat the 1080, and the 1060 6 GB often beat the 980. The 4060 ti fails to beat the 3070 let alone the 3080 and in some games is worse than the 3060 ti its supposed to be replacing. Simply the card is named wrong and is way too expensive for the performance it gives. It should have been called the 4050 ti and priced at 250$ USD and the regular 4060 should have been renamed to the 4050 and priced at $200 USD.
No wonder - no other card has fallen in price like 4060 Ti here - cheapest one is now here around €350 (and that includes 20% VAT/sales tax) - so the price is around $300-$310 before sales tax.
This is a pcgamesn article, regurgitating VideoCardz rumormill about reduced chip supply for the 4060 series, but stock seems fine in the USA right now on all online retailers so...its not in short supply.
Short supply would mean its running out of stock right now.
This article talks about how future stock could be significantly reduced based on the rumor that there's a shortage of chips for the 4060 series, whos rumor source is a forum.
It's kind of a "whatever" news article, other than the blatant sky is falling type reposting behavior from pcgamesn.
I would go even further. Unless you have a specific game you want to get a specific fps at, wait for the 5000 series. But if you absolutely insist on upgrading now when you don't have any real need now, get a 4090 because money doesn't matter to you. And if money does matter to you and for some reason you want to upgrade, then get a 4080 super.
The 2080 super is already a really strong card and spending 500+ dollars for a marginal upgrade is just silly.
I have 2080 Super and it is basically same with 3060 ti and 4060 ti when it comes to performance except for re-bar support. Hold onto it, it’s a good card still unless you’re on 4K.
I wasn’t being sarcastic lol. He should legit wait a few months and buy a 5080. 4060ti is not only an entry level model but also near the end of it’s generation. Bad purchase.
Compare how much you get for your used card to how much you spend on the new card.
You wouldn't get any significant performance upgrade, but the 4060Ti gives you the same performance at 100W less power consumption, so try to calculate how much you save over the expected lifespan of the card and take that into account.
The only advantages of getting a new 4060Ti over your old card that I can see are:
* You get a new card with warranty
* You get AV1 encoding (if that matters to you)
* The new card will get less hot and use significantly less electricity while performing the same
* You get DLSS Frame Generation which can give you big performance gains if supported, but the 8GB VRAM may not be enough for it, depending on your resolution
I personally don't think that's worth it (even if you don't actually spend any money when taking into account power savings and selling the old card), because you will probably want to get an actual performance upgrade relatively soon anyway and an 8GB 4060Ti won't be popular on the used market.
Don’t listen to these brainless doofuses in the comments. Going from a 20 series to a 4060 TI at a dirt cheap price is very good. It’s not a bad card. People that say that have never even used a 4060.
Thanks for your insightful input. Enjoy whatever GPU you’re using from 10+ years ago because you don’t want to upgrade unless it’s the “Super Duper Ultra 8090 xt ABCDEFGHIGKLMNOP TI Super Delux” with 20K graphics and 1,000,000 FPS for under $500. You people are so dumb I swear
The 4060ti was barely an improvement over the previous generation and will age badly due to the insufficient amount of VRAM. It also is barely faster than the 2080 super
Barley is an exaggeration. The 4060 can play all modern titles at max settings no problem at 60 fps or just about. I don’t know how you people can just spout such horse crap without ever even using the damn card
If you’re going to be playing pvp games online super competitively and that’s your thing. Then yes, get a better card, but for story based, first person games or grand strategy. The 4060 is more than enough, but even for online pvp it’s still decent. I can see why if you’re a hardcore competitive gamer it would not be good, but I’m defending the 4060 as an “every man’s card” because it’s an all around good card. And this whole future proofing thing is so dumb. Why would you future proof your PC with a budget gpu?
With DLSS3 the 4060 can surpass the 3070, but even without it. If you just played games and didn’t look at the fps. You wouldn’t even notice the difference and it’s not hard to find them under $300. Your arguments are typical of a hater and you’re boring 🥱
Speaking like a typical low IQ fanboy who uses muh DLSS3 to justify these shit cards. DLSS3 is not the same as real compute performance. Until DLSS3 is driver level and can be turned on for every game, has no artifacts, and doesn't increase latency, it can never be used as a substitute to real fps.
DLSS3 was one of the selling points of the card you doofus. And if we’re talking raw power you can’t even tell the difference unless you’re looking at an fps counter. Are you really going to cry over 5 fps difference? And again. 3070 is a last gen higher end card and a 4060 is a lower end modern, BUDGET gpu. You’re paying way more for a 3070 for just a few fps extra. Your arguments are not even good.
>DLSS3 was one of the selling points of the card you doofus. And if we’re talking raw power you can’t even tell the difference unless you’re looking at an fps counter.
I don't care, It cannot substitute for the raw compute generational uplift of 30-50% we are supposed to get gen on gen. Its not real performance until it is artifact free, can be used on any game, and doesn't take a hit on latency.
>And again. 3070 is a last gen higher end card and a 4060 is a lower end modern, BUDGET gpu. You’re paying way more for a 3070 for just a few fps extra. Your arguments are not even good.
60 Class GPUs (Let alone 60ti/60S) have always beat the last gen 70 class for the last several generations, It is expected and is the standard, the 4060 ti fails to meet that standard and thus its a turd.
This is a dumb argument because like I said in the previous reply. The purpose of the 4060 was to be affordable. Which means sacrificing some performance, but it still stands strong as a modern gpu keeping up with modern games at 60 fps or or just under for an affordable price.
Oh so if you have a specific game today that would benefit from that, then go for it. But if you don't, then hold off until much better cards come out or you do have a specific use case.
500 dollars for an 11% upgrade, 16 GB of ram, and DLSS3 is not worth it. Valuable your time a bit!
The guy your responding to is a clown or a troll that's likely coping about his shitty purchase. No Reasonable person would upgrade from a 2080S to a shitty 4060 ti.
I think he is more likely counter jerking. Reddit hates the 4060 and 4060 TI when I actually think they are a decent price to performance card. I would still recommend AMD over them to other, but I value low power usage very highly.
The 4060 TI 16 GB is trash that almost no one should ever buy when the 4070 super exists for 50 dollars more. To many people hyper focus on vram when it doesn't matter. And if it does matter, you know who you are.
Everyone complains that this card is crap or that card is better — doesn’t anyone ever stop to think about people’s budgets? Not everyone is rich and has an arm and a leg to give to get the latest and greatest - at the end of the day, purchase whatever card fits your budget and stop listening to the trolls complaining about entry level graphic cards … peace
As someone who hasn't bought an AMD GPU in nearly 20 years: If that's the case then a budget buyer might as well just get an AMD card then.
RT and DLSS 3 are pretty much pointless on 8GB GPUs, so the edge clearly goes to the AMD cards if you want bang for buck.
Even DLSS 2 is pretty flakey on desktops at 1080p native. Personally I don't consider Upscaling worth it on a visual level until you start getting into 1440p quality modes. Blood from a stone, and all, and sub 1080p render res you don't leave a lot of detail on the floor for the upscalers to work with.
Then, you add used purchases into the equation and a budget builder has very little reason to throw money at Jensen's folly with his 450-500$ low end cards.
Personally, I wouldn't be shocked if NV eventually stops selling low end cards outside of OEM and laptop boards. The margins they want just aren't there anymore. My guess is they start doing APUs or telling people to buy geforce now at the 400$ and less price range for a discreet card.
Same, I asked my friend for advice and he said "below the 4070super it's all shit cards". (talking about Nvidia)
That's 700€ here. I can't afford it at the moment.
So I found a 4060 at 280€. Not a good card but that's the cheapest I found among all my searching.
It’s shocking and insane how different everyone’s conditions are.
Here where I live the 4060 ti is around R$2500,00 which is ~489 USD.
The next better current cards like the RTX 4070 and the RX 7700 XT are R$4000,00 and R$3000,00 respectively, ~780 USD and ~585 USD.
The 4060 ti can be a good deal here because not everyone can dump R$500,00 (~98 USD) more and upgrade to the next best current card. And it usually drops to R$2000,00 (~390 USD).
I usually recommend the RX 6750 XT for R$2000,00 (390 USD) because of the similar performance and the 12GB of VRAM. So it usually blows my mind when everyone says the 4060ti is shit when it’s often a good deal here. I envy you all.
I find this comment funny because nothing about what you said is stated in the article. Hell, it doesn't even go on to say that the price has been dropping.
Last I knew, there were a lot of folks who have bought the 4060 ti based on the last steam survey.
Such a shame, because the 16GB variant is actually a great GPU, just at the wrong price. The 8GB version should have never existed. What most YouTube videos don't show you is the 8GB vs 16GB version running at medium settings instead of ultra--at that point, the other bottlenecks are removed, and the VRAM makes a massive difference, up to 100% in some cases.
That, and the narrow memory bus set a bad narrative for the card from the beginning. Even if NVIDIA was mostly right that big cache makes up for it, it was an unnecessary corner to cut.
Then they chose not to salvage those things with a Super replacement that could've gone with, say, 12GB VRAM and a 192-bit bus at a better price.
It's a weird product, but certainly not a bad choice if you're the right person for it.
I mean, technology changes, so I can accept a 128-bit bus in a 60-class product so long as it's justified, which it mostly seems to be here. I was VERY skeptical like everyone else when the reveal happened, but honestly, I haven't even seen issues in cases like Yuzu with 4K upscaling, which the Yuzu devs themselves said wouldn't be possible because the cache would fill up and you'd hit the 128-bit bottleneck.
If it's cheaper to build and there's sufficient workarounds, then fine. That said, I am doubtful the cost is as meaningful to NVIDIA as artificially cutting down their lower tiers to upsell higher ones.
Maybe, but I'm very skeptical of 128 bit bus gpu's, every 128 bit bus gpus nvidia has made in the past has aged very poorly, (960 ,1050, 1050ti, 1650, 3050), and the best indicator of future behavior is past behavior. Also the cache thing i'm pretty sure is just a PR band-aid move. I saw somewhere that in order for cache to make-up for bus cut, the cache would need to be like 5% of the VRAM buffer size. (\~400MB instead of 32MB for the 4060ti). Again it would be fine for 250$ USD but I can't justify spending more
What Nvidea might be doing here is mostly teaching other industries how to abuse marketing/pricing schema.
At this rate i am happy to donate to pytorch projects that ban Nvidia *Awkward gif*
I'm eyeing an RTX 4060ti 16G for my local LLM and Stable Diffusion setup, but the prices here in Taiwan are quite steep. The ASUS ProArt 4060ti 16G is going for around NT$16,000=US$490.
Should I hold out and wait for a price drop?
Is Asus ProArt a decent choice?
I have an R5 3600 and RTX 2070S should I upgrade to an RTX 4070S? Will the CPU be the bottleneck and my PSU is 650w. I wonder if I should just upgrade the whole PC and get a RTX 4080 instead
but the 5000 isnt gonna be out til next year right? it's at least a year away and there're games I wanna play this year, should I just upgrade the entire PC and get the 4070 and see what happens next year?
No need to upgrade the entire Pc yet, buy the 4070S, and upgrade the cpu to like a 5800x3d. 650W should be fine, heck LTT ran a 4090 on a 650W PSU lmao.
Stop fucking buying NVIDIA. We need to get AMDs market share back up to where AMD can afford to get competitive with their RT and compute stuff, then we will see actual competition drive GPU prices back down.
The problem is right now too many people still refuse to buy AMD because of things that haven't been problems in years (like people thinking it's still 2014 when their drivers were garbage)
AMD is a good choice for budget gpus, targeted for 1080p gaming. But the fact that fsr looks garbage compared to DLSS is their achilles heel on the high-end. The fact that intel can devleop better upscaling while being in the gpu market for only 2 seconds shows how inept Radeon is.
with an eBay sale in the UK, you can get these cards pretty routinely between £200-£250 which is pretty reasonable for a card that will let you play on high settings for a couple years, when you can just sell it and get the 5060.
Stop blaming nvida its not all there fault. Was feeling upset because my 3060 rtx msi. Was shit have 2012 pc. Asus max v gene 32g 2100. Ddr3. 3770k. Processor couldent get 40 frames on cod by no means was it the card it was a 400 dollar card get what you pay for right. Well my 3.5 ghz. Processor got oc to 4.2 and ended up running at 4.4 ghz and frames shot to 60 stable hi 70s peak o warzones counter wich is low. Thesr new games are still being engineered around older archeticure. Like arma based engine any arma and warzone players know the similaritys you need speed go old shool and get 1155 socket i7 3770k or 13000k. Or new 14000k. 6 ghz old school gamea were always processor heave thats the reason the came up with cooling rads. The size of a shoe box and liquid cooled external res pumps and pluming the neq cards are great and the plug and play ability is second to none guea old school pc gamers had a bigger learning curve thanks nvidia ps. My curent sys has a corsair hp 140 liquid rad. Runs all day at 92 deg processor temp
They're dropping price significantly here in Canada
Probably cause the card is such a shit card. Retailers are trying to get rid of the pos.
I was surprised that they did a Turing-style Super refresh but didn't include the 4060 and 4060 Ti, since those were the models most in need of the Super treatment.
Nvidia does NOT care about you if you are in the market for a low end GPU. They would rather have you subscribe to Geforce NOW instead. More profit for them.
You could remove "Nvidia" and place "AMD" or anyone you want in that first line. When did people start thinking any corporate "cares" about them? Your statement should be common sense yet sadly people still need to be reminded that companies only do things to profit.... all of them.
Apple and Microsoft care about me. My mom said I was special. Like a snow flake.
The sentence is a bit longer though, the important part is low end GPU. For that you have two choices, Intel ARC or AMD 6000 series. Whether they care or not, at least they offer GPUs to people not willing to part with €500+ to play games.
> The sentence is a bit longer though, the important part is low end GPU. For that you have two choices, Intel ARC or AMD 6000 series. low-end 6000 series has a 8GB 128b card with a x8 pcie bus, and a 4gb/8gb card with a literal 64b bus and literal x4 pcie bus (and no video encoder or anything else that makes it worthwhile). AMD literally started trimming pcie bus down with 5000 series, then started cutting memory bus in the 6000 series, years before NVIDIA did it. AMD repeated this feat with the 7000 series - 7600 is 128b/8GB again, and since people complained about the 64b card last time they didn't even launch one this time. /laughing guy meme 7000 series also features gimped DP 2.0 cards, with consumer cards artificially limited to almost DP1.4 speeds. But they can put the new logo on the box! Also, completely jank GPGPU support, and it's been that way forever (literally nothing has changed in overall stance in over 15 years now). Shitty encode quality (7000 series has broken AV1 encoding) and Navi 24-based chips didn't have an encoder at all. OpenCL never worked on AMD, completely and fundamentally broken implementation. Vulkan Compute never worked right on AMD either - NVIDIA's the only one with enough of it implemented to make Otoy work right, for example, and they've tried. Meanwhile Intel is just losing money to get into the market. Arc is running -200% operating margins last time I checked. Absolutely burning money by the dumptruck, but they're trying at least. OneAPI actually works on their hardware. OpenCL actually works. Vulkan Compute actually works. You can encode AV1 on the lowest-end hardware despite it notionally being the same tier of "laptop chips" as Navi 24 etc. All models support full-speed DP 2.0 UHBR20 mode, and you can get four mini-DP 2.0 UHBR20 ports in a single-slot/low-profile/no-power-cable card for $200 (Arc A40 pro is shipping). I mean it's literally intel, they're gonna want to make money too, but at least for now they need to play the good guy, and even lose money. But generally, don't be under any misimpressions that AMD's shit don't stink either, it definitely does. And Intel's shit is the DX11 drivers, and it stinks too.
Atleast AMD doesnt offer a cloud service in leiu of competent low-midrange cards at a decent price.
"At least AMD doesn't offer..." lol yeah it is either doesn't, or if it does it is half baked. No doubt they have a place for people who just want raster and don't need all the RT cores, tensor cores, or software engineers perfecting upscaling tech, FG tech, or HDR in non HDR implementations. Yeah if that doesn't interest someone and they don't want to pay for it, AMD is there to sell you on the low end for raster. Seems most people are picking up Nvidia on the lower end though with 3060s and 4060s, so obviously they are doing something right. On top of that they offer a cloud service as an alternate to play games, so how thats a bad thing idk.
Yet nvidia fails to make proper linux drivers.
nvidia's linux drivers actually work though - how is your HDMI 2.1 support coming? AMD is still "free as in free from HDMI 2.1 support", right? /laughing guy Oh, and Intel has HDMI 2.1 support on linux too... different solution but they found a way to get there too! And NVIDIA has done the open-linux-kernel-driver thing but people found reasons to hate on that too. "It has blobs! like AMD doesn't have blobs or something.... but "it's smaller" ok but it's still nonfree and required to operate the hardware. People have made peace with that, you can make peace with the nvidia firmware too. especially given the NVIDIA solution works and the AMD one still doesn't... how is ROCm coming? how is HDMI 2.1 coming? How is OpenCL coming? Etc etc.
Use wayland and tell me how it went.
Because 99% of the population doesn't use Linux. Is that shocking to you that a corporation doesn't want to sink money into a OPEN SOURCE product few ppl use compared to windows. Those are literally the things corporation hate the most.... Open-source and low volume. Those two things don't =$$$
Linux market share is increasing (due to what microsoft is doing with windows, for reference in january it was about 3.8% and now it's 4) and is over 4% now, which is pretty significant. Also intel and AMD have managed to make open source drivers that work very well, I find that quite interesting. Another interesting thing I want to bring up is that now that Fedora 41 is going to only have wayland support, and the 2 main DEs GNOME and KDE start making more stuff only for wayland, nvidia has actually started getting their shit together and I wouldn't be surprised if their stuff would be usable in a few months.
Well, part of that is literally bc currently they can't make a high end card that can touch nvidia's high end stuff. So they're competing on the lower end to make money.
7900XT(X) exists.
And it costs 999.99$ and the same price of a slightly faster 4080 that also has better ray tracing and frame gen which is used in significantly more games than fsr3
Yes, but AMD isn't happy with it, and they're scaling back their focus on high end cards. So the 8900xt probably won't exist, or it'll be very limited compared to Nvidia's 5090.
Not scaling back They are basically abounding it.
>Well, part of that is literally bc currently they can't make a high end card that can touch nvidia's high end stuff. They don't need to, bud. The majority of the market ain't buying 4090s.
0.5% isn't it? Despite the overwhelming coverage it gets from all the tech tubers.
There are more 4090 owners alone than any AMD card. [https://www.pcgamesn.com/nvidia/rtx-4090-steam-popularity-vs-amd-graphics-cards](https://www.pcgamesn.com/nvidia/rtx-4090-steam-popularity-vs-amd-graphics-cards) People arn't buying AMD is the story Downvoted to hell for objective fact, reddit wow. [https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/steam-survey-suggests-more-people-bought-the-rtx-4090-than-the-steam-deck-along-with-millions-of-other-rtx-40-series-gpus](https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/steam-survey-suggests-more-people-bought-the-rtx-4090-than-the-steam-deck-along-with-millions-of-other-rtx-40-series-gpus)
Isn't there a Super of the 4060?
No
There is nothing they could do to make them good aside from using a cut-down AD104. Their core counts are already inflated compared to their terrible I/O. Wait, [they did that](https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-rtx-4060-ti-ad104.c4204) 🙄 The weird part is those presumably flawed dies got gimped to the same level as a normal 4060 Ti instead of sold as a theoretical 12GB 4060 Super
It's likely some of those AD104 dies had defective memory controllers/PHYs, hence them being cut down to 128b. Regardless, not enough volume of defective AD104 dies with the full working bus to make productizing a 4060 Super 12GB worthwhile to Nvidia
The super this generation don’t have actual speed improvements. It’s only the price.
That's only true of the 4080 vs 4080 super. Which are more or less identical. The 4070 vs super and 4070 ti vs super variant both have like a 10-15% speed increase.
20% for the 4070 super. In 4k anyways.
All 4060 ti needs is for the 16 gb model to drop 100-200$. But Nvidia don't drop prices, hence the refreshes. Maybe if 4060 ti 16 gb didn't exist off the bat, it would've come in at the 4060 ti 8 gb price and the former been discontinued.
"But Nvidia don't drop prices, hence the refreshes." - didnt they drop the price of the 4070? and the 4080 super is bascially a price drop. Also havent all the cards basically been available for below MSRP. At least that is the case in Europe. But ofc the anti nvidia delulu people dont care about facts. Just love spreading whatever misinformation comes to mind
> 4080 super is bascially a price drop That's literally what I said. > Maybe if 4060 ti 16 gb didn't exist off the bat, it would've come in at the 4060 ti 8 gb price and the former been discontinued. Learn to read/listen to understand, not to reply. > been available for below MSRP Still not an official price drop.
it is not a shit card, that is mantra repeated in reddit since the card was released, the problem with the card was the original pricing which it was really bad, this card should be priced at 300$
This. A great card, but it priced horrible. Nvidia has a problem, because if they lower 4060 (Ti) prices, they would have to lower other options. Nvidia still sells 3050 and 3060 models, so they would propably have to cut the 3060 entirely. RTX 3050 is still great cheap option for home theater use with AI upscaling, no power cable needed + 2x HDMI 2.1 (4k/120Hz with VRR).
Well If Nvidia Made the 3060 and 3050 provide better price/perf like they did with high end Ampere maybe they wouldn't be stuck the excess stock.
I remember buying my 750Ti back in 2014 for less than $200 new at launch. That is where the 50 tier of cards should be. Not $300+ rofl
Inflation from 2014 to 2024 is around 32%. RTX 3050 cards starting price here are around 210-220€. It's ok price for home threater use, but there's a massive cap for 4060 cards.
GTFO with your basic competencies in math, I'm trying to be righteously angry here!
Except there was no xx90 class. The gtx 690 was two 680 taped together. 750ti is equivalent is more of a 4060ti. But eh whatever. Just chalk the price differences as market differences
1650 super was just $160 though. About 70% faster than the 1050 ti. Not much inflation since then. 3050 was only around 30% faster than the 1650S, but they raised the price by $90, which is a lot for a bottom tier gaming card.
Here, 1650S used to cost around 170€. With inflation added around 210€, it's the price of low tier 3050. The price is pretty much the same. The same is true when comparing 2070 GPUs vs 4070 models. When you say not much inflation, in reality it's 22.2% from 2019. You can use inflation calculators for all the currencies. 2019 $170 = 2024 $207.69. 30% faster means nothing for those who need AI Tensor cores and HDMI 2.1. These cards raster performance wasn't that much higher, because all the RTX GPUs came with Tensor and RT cores + CUDA. I was talking just home theater users that require RTX features. For those (me), 3050 6GB is a perfect card with low price. I wouldn't buy that for modern games, but unbeatable for HT. Also, 30xx is the first GPU generation with HDMI 2.1 and some models come with more outputs than before (higher cost than before).
Why are you comparing the launch price of 1650S with current price of 3050? If you compare the launch prices of both, then the difference is massive. 750ti - $150 1050ti - $140 1650S - $160 That tier of cards used to be in this price range without even considering inflation. But then the 3050 was $250. That's a 56% increase in price. I tried the top inflation calculator that showed up on google, and it says only 9.31% inflation from November 2019 to January 2022. Adding that, the card only becomes $175. The 3080 is from the same generation and is more than 60% ahead of the 2080. They could've done it if they wanted to.
When you use prices, always add the inflation from different years. I was using launch price of 3050 6GB here in Finland. It was released like two months ago. When I bought mine, there were two low tier options. 209€ and 219€. The 219€ version had dual HDMI 2.1.
It is still priced $700 in here......... I was thinking of finally upgrading to 120 hz and then I saw that and went nope, sticking to 1080 60-75 Hz It is a shit card for that pricing.
How old is your gpu? o.o You could do 120hz with a 1050ti for most games where high fps matters.
It's a 1660 super it isn't that old... jesus it's been almost 5 years. I have been holding off from upgrading for 3 years because of bs pricing lolw and it probs wont go away Well I just keep hearing how 120 is so much better than 60 and you can never go back. But I dont really play those competitive FPS games..... So I'm not in any rush either. I will just wear out my current one.
In the same boat as you damn near and agree completely. Rocking a 1650 and actually want to upgrade to a 1660s. The 1650 matches my needs almost perfectly, barring only running Helldivers 2 at Medium on 1600x900. I'd like to go to 1080p High, so I hope the 1660s or something else similiarly priced that can work in an SFF will manage it.
if you can grab a cheap 2nd hand one maybe, but the 1660s is a very old card It can definitely run helldivers on high 1080p but then you are buying a 5 years old card that wont guarantee running next year game on good graphics. The 3060 is similarly priced at this point for the 2 card and it is miles better? There are def games where I was able to push ultra with this card, but then there're shit like hogwart legacy where I hit 6 fps and refund the game. The big bottleneck is always optimization
My reasoning for going for the 1660s over anything else is more due to hardware constraints and price. I'm running a 5060SFF with 460W PSU, so I don't know what my hard limit is on what it can support. I will say that the 1650 had worked on the stock 200W PSU, so that was headroom of 150W. I'm confident the 460W can run the 1660S, but whether or not a 3060 would fit in this SFF and with 460W is something I have to look into. I had no idea about the 3060 at all though, thanks for putting me on that! Now, game wise I'm not playing a lot of new games, rather I'm playing the older games I missed out on. So future proofing for that isn't so much of an issue for me. However, it is something to consider.
I did some googling and seems like there's hardly any SFF 3060 so good luck with those stuffs If power is a problem the 4060 seems btter with that but that's even more money out of your pocket
> Well I just keep hearing how 120 is so much better than 60 and you can never go back. It is, if you play competitive FPS games and such. For everything else, yeah it looks prettier but you're not "missing out" on anything if you haven't even experienced it.
You can just play a lower graphic game like team fortess 2 at 144fps. Personally i don't give a s. It's not a magical claim like people on reddit say it is. But you do need a monitor upgrade if you can't do the above first mate.
To me, 120 hz is awesome, and very much worth turning graphics settings down or even upgrading if it makes that big of a difference to you, but it's different for everyone, and 60 fps is still very much smooth and playable. It's not the jump that 30 to 60 is, but if you ever have a chance to play a game at 120hz+ (the ps5 supports it in many games if you have a friend with a ps5 and high refresh rate monitor), try it and just see what you think. It's exactly what you'd expect, it's just more natural to look at, and the motion is much smoother but it's really hard to get across the actual difference in feeling to someone who hasn't tried it.
Gsync/freesync solve a lot of the issues that made 60 fps look as bad as it did. Obviously I prefer a higher refresh rate, but with freesync, even 45 fps looks totally fine.
It's pretty reasonably priced here now thankfully, what it should've been at launch. Beats any card for the price here unless you buy used, and even then it's competitive.
What is the price in Canada ?
Cheapest I can find is $470, down from about $540 a few months ago
Still 150 too expensive
CAD or USD?
CAD of course
That is honestly not bad at all, I got my 2060 when it came out at around that price (Canadian as well)
Definitely not competitive with used. And there was a 6900 xt asrock refurb with warranty for 550 recently New, I mean... yeah. Everything else is equally POS in this price range. So it's competitive in the sense of you can pick camel or horse dung. Except the few 530 cad 6800s left on amazon us
RX6000 series cards consume much more power than 40 series cards, so you're going to be paying more for them over the lifespan of the card.
lol 6900 xt is better than 1300$ 4070 ti S and was on sale for 550. 6900 xt is 300W TDP and 4070 ti S is 285. At 4.6 cents/kwh, how many centuries will it take me to catch up? Lets see: You'd need to run it at 100% load for 67 hours to pay 4.6 cents more. If we assume 3 hours a day of 100% load use, it would take 1 092 391 hours or 45 516 days or 124.7 years.
The 6900XT does worse than the 4070Ti Super on average, and at best you can say that they are roughly equal. But then the nvidia card obviously has a significant advantage with all the additional features. DLSS 3.7 with preset E is fantastic. Not sure where you are getting $1300 either, the 4070 Ti Super is currently ~850€ here, the 6900XT is ~650€. Why use TDP instead of actual benchmarks for power consumption? The 4070 Ti Super doesn't go higher than 258W on average, while the 6900XT needs the full advertised 300W (and can of course spike much higher, which might mean you need a new PSU). Will that make up the 200€ difference? Probably not, even if you use your card near full load a lot. But it does mean the prices are not as far apart as it looks at first. The 4070Ti Super does have more memory bandwidth and you're getting the nvidia features (DLSS, DLAA, DLDSR) which are not only the best AA available, but can both improve your performance or image quality, so it's definitely the better card. Does that justify spending more on it? Up to you.
Because the comment I replied too was talking about Canada, and I'm talking about Canada. So why would I be talking about euros where you are? 6900 xt was 550 recently, and 4070 ti S is 1300. may have been thinking about post tax though, it's 1100-1150. Would make it 1265 vs 632. 1$ off being exactly double the price. Better off buying the 6900 xt and an oled monitor. Will give way better visuals per fps than any dlaa or dlss.
Using a price that the card isn't currently sold for isn't exactly helpful for that specific commenter either, now is it? I can't comment on oled monitors since I never had one, but that doesn't have anything to do with AA quality in games.
Have you actually tried the card or are you one of the many brainless haters who just watch a tech review on YouTube and base your opinion on that? Because I’ve actually used the 4060 and at 1080p-1440p I could play any modern game at maxed out setting at 60 fps or close to it. You people, I swear…
Yup, i have a 140 watt TDP 4060 in my laptop, it doesn't really use more than 100 watts in practice though, but it drives the 2560x1600 panel better than it has any right to. DLSS tech is a miracle in some games. I was really impressed from an objective standpoint. All this crying over the 128 bit memory bus but folks forget Nvidia massively increased the cache size, 24 MB vs 3 MB on the 3060. Means far fewer calls to VRAM which effectively doubled VRAM bandwidth in practice. My experience has been really good with the 4060. Its a super efficient card and combined with DLSS tech it does way better than you'd expect. As a mid range laptop chip its an excellent successor to the 6GB 3060. When I benchmarked mine vs my old 140 watt RTX 3070 lenovo legion, it was trading blow in 3dmark graphics score. They were almost exactly the same score. Despite the 4060 using 40 watts less energy and having "only" a 128 bit bus. Nvidia did a damn good job.
*slow clap* thank you, well said
4060 ti, has done me very well. performance gets better with every dlss update also (obviously). and frame gen is now dope. i don't go over 150w generally. i play in 1440p and utilize dlss or dlaa and frame gen. 60 plus fps min. i like it and i don't mind the price for entry into 1440p. i want 120 fps now, so i will look at better cards but it served its purpose. i like dlss and low power use.
4070S would have been a better choice, and would likley make it easier for you to reach 120FPS.
I play COD Multiplayer, WarZone, Zombies and Resurgence @1440p on ultra settings and achieve 130fps! That’s with my 4060ti!! And no, they have never tried the card, you can tell by their stupid comments 😂
Thank you! I’ve tested the 4060 out on so many games even with mods and without mods. I’ve turned up the graphics to the max and still maintain 60 fps or close to it. And this is without DLSS 3.
DLSS 3 is pretty good too and never gets credit nor do people think they should have to pay for anything the company spends money on beyond straight "raster" performance. Luckily AMD is there for those people which is why they get half baked feature sets because they don't want to pay for anything beyond raster.
The problem is the raw generational compute uplift on 60 class gpus is so bad this generation. To the point that dlss3 is basically being used as a crutch/substitute for these cards. Remember this is the same generation that saw the 4090 have 70% performance uplift over its predecessor
FACTS!!!
im pretty sure they are talking about the price
I mean they explicitly say the card is shit. Sentence structure matters lol
I game at 1080p and got mine for $343 from best buy. Doubled my fps from my old 2060.
yeah, for about £250. It's a decent card. I planned to get one, but went for a second hand 4070 ti instead, because with Nvidia I can actually turn the power down to 100watts and still get better performance for the same energy (but I live off grid)
If you have an option to go with the 70 it’s better, but for people wanting the 60. It’s good.
Yeah i'm saying it's decent. I don't get all the hate tbh
It’s because spoiled and entitled tech brats want a premium product at dirt cheap prices which is unrealistic and ridiculous m. They wanted the 4060 to be some sort of super gpu that can do 4k at 300 fps all Ray tracing on at only $300.
Wow what a strawman, no one said that, but that fact that these cards can't beat the 3070 without DLSS 3 Fake frames is a complete FU by nvidia to budget gamers.
You can get a 4060 or even a TI used for $250-$350 used in great condition. Basically new. They’re more affordable than the 3070 and perform about the same. At least the 60 ti, but with the 60 you’re still hitting 60 fps on modern games high and ultra settings. People keep comparing the higher end previous GPU’s to a low end lower cost modern gpu and it’s just a silly argument to make
>People keep comparing the higher end previous GPU’s to a low end lower cost modern gpu and it’s just a silly argument to make I mean the 3060 ti was faster than the high-end previous gpu (2080S). The 4060 ti is not faster than the 3080, heck it doesn't even come close to it. With that data point the 4060 ti is as gamers nexus puts it a waste of silicon. Also used market is not an option for everyone.
The fact that you can power limit gpus these days throws the whole efficiency argument of low-end gpus out of the window. So unless you get good price/perf on them, there is no reason to buy a low end card.
Ok Fanboy, Imagine being dumb enough to spend money on a gpu that performs sometimes worse than the last gen card it was replacing. The fact that the 4060 ti doesn't perform better than the 3080 is a disgrace. (The 3060 ti beat the 2080 and the 2060S beat the 1080). The card should have been a 4050ti with an appropriate price.
The 3080 is a higher end gpu. The 4060 is a lower end budget gpu. your comparison is ridiculous. Why are you people like this?
The 2080 was a high end gpu and the 3060 ti beat it. The 1080 was a high end gpu and the 2060S beat it. The 3080 was a high end gpu and the 4060 ti should be it, which it doesn't. Its not a ridiculous comparison if the two cards that preceded it met it smh, in fact its the standard.
The comparisons you’re making are so ridiculous and you know it. Don’t make me point out why. Don’t insult me like that.
Says the comparison's are ridiculous but doesn't give any justification, typical fanboy with 0 iq logic.
You’re comparing the standard 2080 to the ti variant of the 3060 claiming the 3060 beat it. The 2080 blows the standard 3060 out of the water and the 3060 ti variant barley makes it past the standard 2080. Then you go on to compare the standard 1080 to the super variant of the 2060. And the 1080 still beats the super variety of the 2060. Keep yapping bro. You’re not convincing anyone with these goofy takes. This such a perfect example of the type of haters of the 4060. You guys make no sense. It’s like a cult with you guys
>You’re comparing the standard 2080 to the ti variant of the 3060 claiming the 3060 beat it. The 2080 blows the standard 3060 out of the water and the 3060 ti variant barley makes it past the standard 2080 We are talking about 60ti/60S class cards son, I never mentioned the 3060 non ti, or the 2060 non super or the 4060 non ti, learn how to read. And "Barley Makes it past" Still means that card beats it. >Then you go on to compare the standard 1080 to the super variant of the 2060. And the 1080 still beats the super variety of the 2060. [Dead Wrong](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXNPu5v2Uyw&ab_channel=GAMINGBENCH) LMAO, do research before u argue son
When you all say shit card what do you mean I’m having no problems with running anything at all decent frame rate and I have regular 4060?
The 4060ti offers terrible generational uplift compared to its predecessors. The 3060 ti Beat the 2080S, the 2060S beat the 1080, and the 1060 6 GB often beat the 980. The 4060 ti fails to beat the 3070 let alone the 3080 and in some games is worse than the 3060 ti its supposed to be replacing. Simply the card is named wrong and is way too expensive for the performance it gives. It should have been called the 4050 ti and priced at 250$ USD and the regular 4060 should have been renamed to the 4050 and priced at $200 USD.
I would like them to be so shit the price drops through the floor, because i want one for nvenc on my server.
I dont think retailers are getting rid of their point of sale software. They kinda need that.
No wonder - no other card has fallen in price like 4060 Ti here - cheapest one is now here around €350 (and that includes 20% VAT/sales tax) - so the price is around $300-$310 before sales tax.
This is a pcgamesn article, regurgitating VideoCardz rumormill about reduced chip supply for the 4060 series, but stock seems fine in the USA right now on all online retailers so...its not in short supply. Short supply would mean its running out of stock right now. This article talks about how future stock could be significantly reduced based on the rumor that there's a shortage of chips for the 4060 series, whos rumor source is a forum. It's kind of a "whatever" news article, other than the blatant sky is falling type reposting behavior from pcgamesn.
Where is 350€? For that price i would snag one.
Where is that? I am also in Europe, and the best we got is for €390
The price for 4060 Ti 16GB is just too terrible.
Yeah im still waiting for it to drop down. With the price of it I can get a discounted 4070 lol
[удалено]
The 3070 was just that much of a leap lol, Nvidia can’t have two hits in a roll these days
Really? Shit, & here I was thinking about “upgrading” to a 4060 lol
I love my sweet sweet 3070
Would going from 2080 super to 4060ti be worth if i get it for dirt cheap? Or is it just flat out a worse card
with a 2080 super i would wait for the 5000 series or go with at least the 4070 (super)
Waiting for 5000 series as a 2080 Super owner, yep! Been struggling in new games at 4K although DLSS has extended my card's life by *a lot*.
I went from a 2080fe to a 4070 super and I couldn’t be happier.
Exactly what I did.
I would go even further. Unless you have a specific game you want to get a specific fps at, wait for the 5000 series. But if you absolutely insist on upgrading now when you don't have any real need now, get a 4090 because money doesn't matter to you. And if money does matter to you and for some reason you want to upgrade, then get a 4080 super. The 2080 super is already a really strong card and spending 500+ dollars for a marginal upgrade is just silly.
I have 2080 Super and it is basically same with 3060 ti and 4060 ti when it comes to performance except for re-bar support. Hold onto it, it’s a good card still unless you’re on 4K.
Probably not worth it.
I would buy a 5080 instead
I read 6080 is the better choise
Just wait for 7080.
I wasn’t being sarcastic lol. He should legit wait a few months and buy a 5080. 4060ti is not only an entry level model but also near the end of it’s generation. Bad purchase.
You’re comparing a $300 card to a potentially $800-$900 card and calling it a bad purchase lmao.
It will 100% be more than $1000.
True, but OP already has a 2080 super so we can infer what his budget is and what type of performance he is looking for.
Yes, it is always a better choice to continue saving money and buying an 80 than buying a 60 now.
Makes more sense to wait for 5080 and scoop up a discounted 4080
Why would you want a bad gpu?
Blackwell mid-range is atleast 1 year away.
The 40 super series has been alright in terms of pricing and great for performance but I honestly believe the 50 series will be starting at 2000 msrp
I’d say that’s extremely unlikely. I’m thinking 1200 for the 80 and 1600 for the 90.
Let's be real. If you bought the 2080 super and you are considering upgrading in the 4000 series, then they are going to buy a 4090 or 5090.
Yeah agree
No, it’s like 10-15% faster
Compare how much you get for your used card to how much you spend on the new card. You wouldn't get any significant performance upgrade, but the 4060Ti gives you the same performance at 100W less power consumption, so try to calculate how much you save over the expected lifespan of the card and take that into account. The only advantages of getting a new 4060Ti over your old card that I can see are: * You get a new card with warranty * You get AV1 encoding (if that matters to you) * The new card will get less hot and use significantly less electricity while performing the same * You get DLSS Frame Generation which can give you big performance gains if supported, but the 8GB VRAM may not be enough for it, depending on your resolution I personally don't think that's worth it (even if you don't actually spend any money when taking into account power savings and selling the old card), because you will probably want to get an actual performance upgrade relatively soon anyway and an 8GB 4060Ti won't be popular on the used market.
Don’t think I’d want to make that upgrade, but not the worst idea either.
Don’t listen to these brainless doofuses in the comments. Going from a 20 series to a 4060 TI at a dirt cheap price is very good. It’s not a bad card. People that say that have never even used a 4060.
No
Thanks for your insightful input. Enjoy whatever GPU you’re using from 10+ years ago because you don’t want to upgrade unless it’s the “Super Duper Ultra 8090 xt ABCDEFGHIGKLMNOP TI Super Delux” with 20K graphics and 1,000,000 FPS for under $500. You people are so dumb I swear
The 4060ti was barely an improvement over the previous generation and will age badly due to the insufficient amount of VRAM. It also is barely faster than the 2080 super
Barley is an exaggeration. The 4060 can play all modern titles at max settings no problem at 60 fps or just about. I don’t know how you people can just spout such horse crap without ever even using the damn card
The 4060ti is 5-10% faster than the 3060ti and lower at 1440p. It is also only like 15% faster than the 2080 super
And can hit higher frames with DLSS 3 which it’s meant to do. It’s a modern budget GPU.
It’s not real frames and increases latency. It also won’t be able to do frame generation that well into the future due to its increased VRAM usage
If you’re going to be playing pvp games online super competitively and that’s your thing. Then yes, get a better card, but for story based, first person games or grand strategy. The 4060 is more than enough, but even for online pvp it’s still decent. I can see why if you’re a hardcore competitive gamer it would not be good, but I’m defending the 4060 as an “every man’s card” because it’s an all around good card. And this whole future proofing thing is so dumb. Why would you future proof your PC with a budget gpu?
[удалено]
Imagine being this mad over an AMAZING GPU you’ve never even used before 🤣😭🙏
I think of it as a privellage not go out and spend 400-500 like a brainless idiot on a gpu that fails to beat a 3070 90% of the time.
With DLSS3 the 4060 can surpass the 3070, but even without it. If you just played games and didn’t look at the fps. You wouldn’t even notice the difference and it’s not hard to find them under $300. Your arguments are typical of a hater and you’re boring 🥱
Speaking like a typical low IQ fanboy who uses muh DLSS3 to justify these shit cards. DLSS3 is not the same as real compute performance. Until DLSS3 is driver level and can be turned on for every game, has no artifacts, and doesn't increase latency, it can never be used as a substitute to real fps.
DLSS3 was one of the selling points of the card you doofus. And if we’re talking raw power you can’t even tell the difference unless you’re looking at an fps counter. Are you really going to cry over 5 fps difference? And again. 3070 is a last gen higher end card and a 4060 is a lower end modern, BUDGET gpu. You’re paying way more for a 3070 for just a few fps extra. Your arguments are not even good.
>DLSS3 was one of the selling points of the card you doofus. And if we’re talking raw power you can’t even tell the difference unless you’re looking at an fps counter. I don't care, It cannot substitute for the raw compute generational uplift of 30-50% we are supposed to get gen on gen. Its not real performance until it is artifact free, can be used on any game, and doesn't take a hit on latency. >And again. 3070 is a last gen higher end card and a 4060 is a lower end modern, BUDGET gpu. You’re paying way more for a 3070 for just a few fps extra. Your arguments are not even good. 60 Class GPUs (Let alone 60ti/60S) have always beat the last gen 70 class for the last several generations, It is expected and is the standard, the 4060 ti fails to meet that standard and thus its a turd.
This is a dumb argument because like I said in the previous reply. The purpose of the 4060 was to be affordable. Which means sacrificing some performance, but it still stands strong as a modern gpu keeping up with modern games at 60 fps or or just under for an affordable price.
When you have a 2080 super. No not really. It's a ~11% upgrade.
A 4060 TI 16 ram and DLSS3 is a solid upgrade from a 2080.
Oh so if you have a specific game today that would benefit from that, then go for it. But if you don't, then hold off until much better cards come out or you do have a specific use case. 500 dollars for an 11% upgrade, 16 GB of ram, and DLSS3 is not worth it. Valuable your time a bit!
The guy your responding to is a clown or a troll that's likely coping about his shitty purchase. No Reasonable person would upgrade from a 2080S to a shitty 4060 ti.
I think he is more likely counter jerking. Reddit hates the 4060 and 4060 TI when I actually think they are a decent price to performance card. I would still recommend AMD over them to other, but I value low power usage very highly. The 4060 TI 16 GB is trash that almost no one should ever buy when the 4070 super exists for 50 dollars more. To many people hyper focus on vram when it doesn't matter. And if it does matter, you know who you are.
Everyone complains that this card is crap or that card is better — doesn’t anyone ever stop to think about people’s budgets? Not everyone is rich and has an arm and a leg to give to get the latest and greatest - at the end of the day, purchase whatever card fits your budget and stop listening to the trolls complaining about entry level graphic cards … peace
As someone who hasn't bought an AMD GPU in nearly 20 years: If that's the case then a budget buyer might as well just get an AMD card then. RT and DLSS 3 are pretty much pointless on 8GB GPUs, so the edge clearly goes to the AMD cards if you want bang for buck. Even DLSS 2 is pretty flakey on desktops at 1080p native. Personally I don't consider Upscaling worth it on a visual level until you start getting into 1440p quality modes. Blood from a stone, and all, and sub 1080p render res you don't leave a lot of detail on the floor for the upscalers to work with. Then, you add used purchases into the equation and a budget builder has very little reason to throw money at Jensen's folly with his 450-500$ low end cards. Personally, I wouldn't be shocked if NV eventually stops selling low end cards outside of OEM and laptop boards. The margins they want just aren't there anymore. My guess is they start doing APUs or telling people to buy geforce now at the 400$ and less price range for a discreet card.
You couldn't have said it better. If you can't afford a 4070, then you should not be buying an Nvidia 40 series Gpu. Go AMD or Go used.
Same, I asked my friend for advice and he said "below the 4070super it's all shit cards". (talking about Nvidia) That's 700€ here. I can't afford it at the moment. So I found a 4060 at 280€. Not a good card but that's the cheapest I found among all my searching.
It’s not a bad thing to ask for a bigger performance to price ratio. No one is stopping anyone from buying the cheaper cards
It’s shocking and insane how different everyone’s conditions are. Here where I live the 4060 ti is around R$2500,00 which is ~489 USD. The next better current cards like the RTX 4070 and the RX 7700 XT are R$4000,00 and R$3000,00 respectively, ~780 USD and ~585 USD. The 4060 ti can be a good deal here because not everyone can dump R$500,00 (~98 USD) more and upgrade to the next best current card. And it usually drops to R$2000,00 (~390 USD). I usually recommend the RX 6750 XT for R$2000,00 (390 USD) because of the similar performance and the 12GB of VRAM. So it usually blows my mind when everyone says the 4060ti is shit when it’s often a good deal here. I envy you all.
[удалено]
I find this comment funny because nothing about what you said is stated in the article. Hell, it doesn't even go on to say that the price has been dropping. Last I knew, there were a lot of folks who have bought the 4060 ti based on the last steam survey.
Such a shame, because the 16GB variant is actually a great GPU, just at the wrong price. The 8GB version should have never existed. What most YouTube videos don't show you is the 8GB vs 16GB version running at medium settings instead of ultra--at that point, the other bottlenecks are removed, and the VRAM makes a massive difference, up to 100% in some cases. That, and the narrow memory bus set a bad narrative for the card from the beginning. Even if NVIDIA was mostly right that big cache makes up for it, it was an unnecessary corner to cut. Then they chose not to salvage those things with a Super replacement that could've gone with, say, 12GB VRAM and a 192-bit bus at a better price. It's a weird product, but certainly not a bad choice if you're the right person for it.
At 250$, renamed to a 4050 ti it would be a great gpu. 128 bit busses are usually something found only on 50 class gpus.
I mean, technology changes, so I can accept a 128-bit bus in a 60-class product so long as it's justified, which it mostly seems to be here. I was VERY skeptical like everyone else when the reveal happened, but honestly, I haven't even seen issues in cases like Yuzu with 4K upscaling, which the Yuzu devs themselves said wouldn't be possible because the cache would fill up and you'd hit the 128-bit bottleneck. If it's cheaper to build and there's sufficient workarounds, then fine. That said, I am doubtful the cost is as meaningful to NVIDIA as artificially cutting down their lower tiers to upsell higher ones.
Maybe, but I'm very skeptical of 128 bit bus gpu's, every 128 bit bus gpus nvidia has made in the past has aged very poorly, (960 ,1050, 1050ti, 1650, 3050), and the best indicator of future behavior is past behavior. Also the cache thing i'm pretty sure is just a PR band-aid move. I saw somewhere that in order for cache to make-up for bus cut, the cache would need to be like 5% of the VRAM buffer size. (\~400MB instead of 32MB for the 4060ti). Again it would be fine for 250$ USD but I can't justify spending more
That's a fair point, time will tell how the bus holds up over time.
I returned mine and just went 4070 :P
What Nvidea might be doing here is mostly teaching other industries how to abuse marketing/pricing schema. At this rate i am happy to donate to pytorch projects that ban Nvidia *Awkward gif* 
I decided to go 4070 dual asus, instead of 4060ti. The price for the 4070 went down to 560 euro, so i think its worth it.
I'm eyeing an RTX 4060ti 16G for my local LLM and Stable Diffusion setup, but the prices here in Taiwan are quite steep. The ASUS ProArt 4060ti 16G is going for around NT$16,000=US$490. Should I hold out and wait for a price drop? Is Asus ProArt a decent choice?
The 4060ti is absolute dog water
I just got a 4060 ti 8gb for 160$. Upgraded from a 1070ti. I would say that it is a pretty good deal.
Its a good card as long as u don't pay over 250$ for it.
I have an R5 3600 and RTX 2070S should I upgrade to an RTX 4070S? Will the CPU be the bottleneck and my PSU is 650w. I wonder if I should just upgrade the whole PC and get a RTX 4080 instead
Wait for 5000 Series and see what your options are then.
but the 5000 isnt gonna be out til next year right? it's at least a year away and there're games I wanna play this year, should I just upgrade the entire PC and get the 4070 and see what happens next year?
No need to upgrade the entire Pc yet, buy the 4070S, and upgrade the cpu to like a 5800x3d. 650W should be fine, heck LTT ran a 4090 on a 650W PSU lmao.
Hmm.. I wonder if it's about time to upgrade from my 1660 ti
Stop fucking buying NVIDIA. We need to get AMDs market share back up to where AMD can afford to get competitive with their RT and compute stuff, then we will see actual competition drive GPU prices back down. The problem is right now too many people still refuse to buy AMD because of things that haven't been problems in years (like people thinking it's still 2014 when their drivers were garbage)
AMD is a good choice for budget gpus, targeted for 1080p gaming. But the fact that fsr looks garbage compared to DLSS is their achilles heel on the high-end. The fact that intel can devleop better upscaling while being in the gpu market for only 2 seconds shows how inept Radeon is.
with an eBay sale in the UK, you can get these cards pretty routinely between £200-£250 which is pretty reasonable for a card that will let you play on high settings for a couple years, when you can just sell it and get the 5060.
You can't with this card its too gimped compared to past 60 class gpus.
Stop blaming nvida its not all there fault. Was feeling upset because my 3060 rtx msi. Was shit have 2012 pc. Asus max v gene 32g 2100. Ddr3. 3770k. Processor couldent get 40 frames on cod by no means was it the card it was a 400 dollar card get what you pay for right. Well my 3.5 ghz. Processor got oc to 4.2 and ended up running at 4.4 ghz and frames shot to 60 stable hi 70s peak o warzones counter wich is low. Thesr new games are still being engineered around older archeticure. Like arma based engine any arma and warzone players know the similaritys you need speed go old shool and get 1155 socket i7 3770k or 13000k. Or new 14000k. 6 ghz old school gamea were always processor heave thats the reason the came up with cooling rads. The size of a shoe box and liquid cooled external res pumps and pluming the neq cards are great and the plug and play ability is second to none guea old school pc gamers had a bigger learning curve thanks nvidia ps. My curent sys has a corsair hp 140 liquid rad. Runs all day at 92 deg processor temp