ASUS GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Dual OC

[W1zzard]

The 4060Ti Dual 16GB version has dual bios. The 8GB version doesn't have one. I don't understand why either.

ooh .. yeah .. right .. even the 4060 non-Ti Dual

 

[bug]

The 4060Ti Dual 16GB version has dual bios. The 8GB version doesn't have one. I don't understand why either.

You're not supposed to update the video card's BIOS anyway.

 

[Taraquin]

You're not supposed to update the video card's BIOS anyway.

It is more for the silent\performance-bios-feature I would guess

 

[Assimilator]

@W1zzard wouldn't it be more correct to say this is a 2.5 slot cooler? Or don't you bother with the "half slot" nomenclature?

On the same topic, it would IMO be helpful to show the actual profile of the GPU so that people can see for themselves. You could accomplish this without an extra photo by changing the traditional angled image of the ports:

to be end-on, similarly to the manufacturer photos on the product page:

 

[W1zzard]

Or don't you bother with the "half slot" nomenclature?

I do not

by changing the traditional angled image of the ports

I always felt that my angle is more interesting than the flat-on shot. card3.jpg is the one for card width. I also recently added the "50 mm" part, will include that in all reviews going forward

 

[Taraquin]

What do you mean? It's quieter and cooler than several of the other 4060 Ti cards tested - and at just 74C at 34dBa there's headroom to slow the fans down before it even starts to affect boost clocks.

No, it's not as cool as larger cards, but with the exception of the FE which has never been a fair comparison to AIB vendors, it's as good or better than the dual-fan competition, and these cards are power-limited so there's really no benefit to keeping them cooler than the temperature target in the first place.

If you want a larger, triple-fan card for the $399 MSRP, the MSI or Gigabyte models will serve you just fine.

The 4070 cooler is only slightly bigger but cools a lot better. I thought if noise more than temps

 

[ARF]

Debatable. GPUs have several characteristics: rastering HP, RT HP, power draw, noise, price... If you cherry pick, any card will be "vastly superior" to pretty much any other. If you look at the whole package... cards that win in all aspects are rare.

Radeon RX 6800 16GB vs RTX 4060 Ti 8GB
VRAM: 16 GB vs only 8 GB (100% more)
rastering HP: already posted 22% higher
RT HP: 14% higher
power draw: 235 watts vs 159 watts
noise: 35-36 dBA vs 34 dBA
price: 450 incl. a game vs 400

As you can see, the only thing which can be debated is the power draw, slightly more but can be easily fixed with undervolting and underclocking the RX 6800 if one really cares.

Also, the vastly superior Radeon Software package vs the decades-old geforce driver control panel which is as ugly as it can get...

 

[SCP-001]

Doubtful. RX 7800 XT will be to RX 6800 XT what currently RTX 4060 Ti is to RTX 3060 Ti.
Basically, nothing even worth a discussion.

I really hope it also won't follow the pricing trend of the 60 cards, but knowing how AMD has been acting the past few generations, it will

 

[Jism]

Finally, 8GB vs 12GB vs 16GB argument out of the window.

 

[Chrispy_]

@W1zzard wouldn't it be more correct to say this is a 2.5 slot cooler? Or don't you bother with the "half slot" nomenclature?

I do not

If it overhangs by even a tiny fraction the whole slot cannot be used for anything else.

Got a teeny-tiny "quarter-slot" wide card reader?

Tough luck, your 2.1-slot graphics card is blocking that third slot.

The 4070 cooler is only slightly bigger but cools a lot better. I thought if noise more than temps

I'd disagree with your use of the word slightly
It's almost 50% heavier, has 120mm fans instead of 92mm fans, and looking at Asus' official dimensions, it's about 35% larger by volume because it's not only longer, it's also taller and wider.

If you want a massive card, there's no shortage of larger options from both Asus and other manufacturers. Size is a genuine issue, which is why many reviewers mark down graphics cards that are unnecessarily large, and manufacturers all make GPUs in a wide range of sizes despite having otherwise identical specs...

Palit 4060 Ti:

Asus 3060 Ti:

 

[bug]

Radeon RX 6800 16GB vs RTX 4060 Ti 8GB
VRAM: 16 GB vs only 8 GB (100% more)
rastering HP: already posted 22% higher
RT HP: 14% higher
power draw: 235 watts vs 159 watts
noise: 35-36 dBA vs 34 dBA
price: 450 incl. a game vs 400

As you can see, the only thing which can be debated is the power draw, slightly more but can be easily fixed with undervolting and underclocking the RX 6800 if one really cares.

Also, the vastly superior Radeon Software package vs the decades-old geforce driver control panel which is as ugly as it can get...

You'd get 14-22% more HP for ~11% more money. But that's at 4k and it's debatable if either is a 4k card.
Pricing is also a wildcard, it's not the same all over the world.
Noise also varies. I expect the difference can be greater than 2dB, depending on implementation.
If you really want 4k, 4060Ti has DLSS3 to help you there, 6800XT has... vastly superior something, I guess.
I love how +50% more power draw is "slightly more", shows you absolutely objective.

As for the drivers... I have seen more complaints about the "vastly superior" AMD drivers than I have seen about Nvidia. And that says something, considering there are far more Nvidia cards out there. Unless you were simply referring to staring at the control panel, in which case you were probably right.

 

[N/A]

Finally, 8GB vs 12GB vs 16GB argument out of the window.

Better safe than sorry. Go for the middle ground I guess.

 

[bug]

Better safe than sorry. Go for the middle ground I guess.

Whether you buy a current-gen card or a discounted last-gen, I don't see how you'd not be sorry if you have to buy this year. Or the next.

 

[Lesha]

@W1zzard It would be great to include some AI use cases, for example Topaz Gigapixel AI and Topaz Video AI, as it supports AMD cards as well. I am sure many would be interested in that.

 

[W1zzard]

I am sure many would be interested in that.

I doubt that. No plans to add any compute testing at this time, even when Bitcoin was hot, the traffic wasn't worth the time spent.

 

[Bzuco]

And the joke is the 6800XT is actually faster at ray tracing than the 4060TI-16gb in the vast majority of games

OMG Check the CP77 RT results where RT is most implemented. Even if 6800XT would have 400W power consumption it would be not enough to match 160W 4060ti RT performance.
I hope you're not one of those people who say the 4060 ti is a waste of sand, but the waste of electricity on AMD or older NVIDIA cards when price match is perfectly fine.

As testing shows, even this entry-level cooler is total overkill for the paltry 160W board power. Why you'd waste money on a bigger, heavier, saggier cooler is beyond me. "Oh, but it'll be even quieter". Well yes, but there's so much thermal headroom with this cooler that you can absolutely set the fans much slower and still stay below Nvidia's 83C thermal target.

It's all kind of a moot point right now because nobody is buying 4060 Ti cards anyway, and if they were, there are better $400 options than this one. $400 for an 8GB GPU would be bad enough if that was the only problem, but miserly, e-waste levels of VRAM allocation on this product aren't even the biggest problem, it's all the competition from AMD and The Ghost of Nvidia Past.

Nvidia Turbo Boost technology does not like temperatures over 60°C. You can reach higher max. TB frequencies, especially in lower power consumption scenarios like video encoding, shader computational tasks, offline rendering and also in non RT games. Undervolt and OC at the same time helps to reach absolute top frequencies.

I have cooler from this edition and I wish it would be thicker/larger or 3 fan design.

Radeon RX 6800 16GB vs RTX 4060 Ti 8GB
VRAM: 16 GB vs only 8 GB (100% more)
rastering HP: already posted 22% higher
RT HP: 14% higher
power draw: 235 watts vs 159 watts
noise: 35-36 dBA vs 34 dBA
price: 450 incl. a game vs 400

As you can see, the only thing which can be debated is the power draw, slightly more but can be easily fixed with undervolting and underclocking the RX 6800 if one really cares.

Also, the vastly superior Radeon Software package vs the decades-old geforce driver control panel which is as ugly as it can get...

Don't be lazy and pick correct fair numbers. In pure RT like port royal RT it is 35 vs 38 fps...so 8% slower...so it is also worth to mention.
Why did you choose results from 4k gaming?? is 4060ti designed to play on 4k??....no. But in case DLSS3 it is possible, then why did you not count that?
Dont't forget RTX card can be also greatly undervolted

 

[ARF]

Why did you choose results from 4k gaming

Because 4K is the most pure graphics load, without CPU bottlenecks.

 

[N/A]

Should be applied only to playable resolutions above 60, and arguably above 80. And fair enough 4060 Ti 8 is getting smashed by the 6800 USA only unicorn starfield bundle limited edition in FC6:4K. But for only 49 more you can get the 16G edition (Im upselling it) and why not go for 4070 instead.

 

[b1k3rdude]

Even if 6800XT would have 400W power consumption it would be not enough to match 160W 4060ti RT performance.
I hope you're not one of those people who say the 4060 ti is a waste of sand, but the waste of electricity on AMD or older NVIDIA cards when price match is perfectly fine.

Firstly its 300w (check the TPU database), so the 6800 XT is only using 139w more. And if you to take this further, the 3080 is a 250w card, so only 89w more and will like the 6800XT detroy the 4060 Ti. I had a 12GB 3080 and curve optomized it in Msi afterburner, so for most games it never cracked the 200w mark.

Im saying at the PRICE nVidie are charging, the 4060/4060TI are INDEED a waste sand. As Hardware unbox have stated (and I agree), the 4060/ti is a 050 series cards and should have been marked and sold as such. For the money users are better off with a 3080-12gb or a 6800XT.

 

[bug]

Firstly its 300w (check the TPU database), so the 6800 XT is only using 139w more. And if you to take this further, the 3080 is a 250w card, so only 89w more and will like the 6800XT detroy the 4060 Ti. I had a 12GB 3080 and curve optomized it in Msi afterburner, so for most games it never cracked the 200w mark.

Im saying at the PRICE nVidie are charging, the 4060/4060TI are INDEED a waste sand. As Hardware unbox have stated (and I agree), the 4060/ti is a 050 series cards and should have been marked and sold as such. For the money users are better off with a 3080-12gb or a 6800XT.

First, you can't say "only 139W more Watts", when comparing to a 160W cards. That's almost 100% more power drawn.

Second, if you look at 4060Ti from my point of view (i.e. someone looking to upgrade from a 1060, with an affinity for lower TDP), it's much faster in all regards and it comes with DLSS3 for a bit of extra oomph, just in case. Expensive, for sure, but so is every other alternative. What stopped me from pulling the trigger on a 4060Ti is the memory bus. If you look at the benchmarks closely, there are times when the 3060Ti is faster, most likely because the 4060Ti runs out of cache. Imho, you can look at a 4060Ti as a waste of sand or you can look at it as a pretty capable card. But the word that describes it best is imbalanced.

 

[Chrispy_]

Nvidia Turbo Boost technology does not like temperatures over 60°C. You can reach higher max. TB frequencies, especially in lower power consumption scenarios like video encoding, shader computational tasks, offline rendering and also in non RT games. Undervolt and OC at the same time helps to reach absolute top frequencies.

If you have GPU-Z open when you're doing this, you'll see that the limiting factor is PWR or Vrel.

At no point is temperature limiting your clocks, that was a 20-series thing - both the 30-series and 40-series have been so heavily hamstrung by Nvidia's power limits that it's exceptionally hard to reach a temperature limit with Nvidia GPUs in the last couple of generations.

If you undervolt, yes you get higher clocks. That is what I said in post #19.

First, you can't say "only 139W more Watts", when comparing to a 160W cards. That's almost 100% more power drawn.

Second, if you look at 4060Ti from my point of view (i.e. someone looking to upgrade from a 1060, with an affinity for lower TDP), it's much faster in all regards and it comes with DLSS3 for a bit of extra oomph, just in case. Expensive, for sure, but so is every other alternative. What stopped me from pulling the trigger on a 4060Ti is the memory bus. If you look at the benchmarks closely, there are times when the 3060Ti is faster, most likely because the 4060Ti runs out of cache. Imho, you can look at a 4060Ti as a waste of sand or you can look at it as a pretty capable card. But the word that describes it best is imbalanced.

I love my 6800XT but it's power hungry and doesn't undervolt particularly well for an RDNA2 card.

As dumb as the 4070 is for the money, I'm sorely tempted to sidegrade to it just to reduce the power consumption by 100W+, since I don't have air-conditioning and I really do get warm when my system is pushing out 400W into the room. If I could get that down to 275W or something with a 4070+undervolt I'd be willing to pay Nvidia's horrible prices and hope that I upgrade again before 12GB becomes a problem.

 

[b1k3rdude]

Imho, you can look at a 4060Ti as a waste of sand or you can look at it as a pretty capable card. But the word that describes it best is imbalanced.

Fair comment, when the card drops to £250.

 

[Bzuco]

@b1k3rdude I know it is 300W card, I just wanted to highlited how much watts would be needed to match 4060ti's RT raw performance. Therefor I wrote "Even if..."

200W is nice result for 3080, all chips can be greatly optimized, no need to talk about it, 4060ti can run anywhere between 15-160W, it is our choice.

Advising older power hungry cards which are good for older raster techniques in games and have not frame gen tech. and not good RT performance, is sad...especially in this low end class cards(people in this segment want to have card for several years, not just for next few years).

 

[ARF]

Advising older power hungry cards which are good for older raster techniques in games and have not frame gen tech. and not good RT performance, is sad...especially in this low end class cards(people in this segment want to have card for several years, not just for next few years).

Power hungry is better than VRAM limited. You definitely don't want any 8GB card

 

[b1k3rdude]

As dumb as the 4070 is for the money, I'm sorely tempted to sidegrade to it just to reduce the power consumption by 100W+, since I don't have air-conditioning and I really do get warm when my system is pushing out 400W into the room. If I could get that down to 275W or something with a 4070+undervolt I'd be willing to pay Nvidia's horrible prices and hope that I upgrade again before 12GB becomes a problem.

What descrete GPU are you using atm?, as it not listed in your system specs.

And utilising curve optomizer (ctrl-f) in MSI afterburner is a good way to reduce power consumption with only a minor drop in fps for most cards. I did it on my 3080_12gb (150-200avg, 250max) and Im doing the same with my 4080, 185-215avg and 250max.

Advising older power hungry cards which are good for older raster techniques in games and have not frame gen tech. and not good RT performance, is sad...especially in this low end class cards(people in this segment want to have card for several years, not just for next few years).

Fair comment, but when the 4060/Ti isnt much of an upgrade of previous gen, due to the willfully stunted specs. Then logically I am going to stand stand by my recomendation/s. As Ive said previously, when the card drops below £300 this will be a viable card, but even then the 8GB frame buffer is a serious limitation.

In the uk we have cex.co.uk where you can get a 3080-10GB for £440 w/2yr warranty - https://uk.webuy.com/search?stext=3...ds&price=437:566&sortBy=prod_cex_uk_price_asc