MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ventus 2X OC

[W1zzard]

MSI's Ventus 2X is a factory-overclocked custom design variant of the RTX 4060 that still comes at NVIDIA's MSRP of $300. Thanks to a compact design the card and its dual-slot, dual-fan cooler will fit all cases, and the lower power requirements will ensure that even older PSUs can run the card just fine.

Show full review

 

[KellyNyanbinary]

NVIDIA strikes again.

 

[ARF]

How is the Maximum power lower than the average Gaming power?

Terrible idle power consumption:

 

[Squared]

Terrible idle power consumption

Funny; one argument for buying this is lower power bills compared to an RTX 3060 or RX 7600. But the idle power consumption may be more costly in the long run than the gaming power consumption for most users.

After watching the Linus Tech Tips review, I was expecting this card to have worse value relative to the competition. The RX 7600 at MSRP offers 96% of the performance for 90% of the cost, although the RX 7600 can be had below MSRP. For the performance and features, the RTX 4060 would be a pretty good competitor to the RX 7600 if its price drops just a little.

But the RTX 4090 offered like 45% better performance than the RTX 3090 Ti, and this can't even match the RTX 3060 Ti. So it's still disappointing.

 

[Zareek]

Wow, I assumed this would be underwhelming. I guess it matches the rest of the Ada cards, except the overpriced monster at the top.

 

[W1zzard]

How is the Maximum power lower than the average Gaming power?

"Maximum" is Furmark

"For cost-savings, the RTX 4060 doesn't have dedicated board power monitoring hardware on the PCB, so the power draw is estimated, which results in unexpected readings in GPU-Z, and the power throttling mechanism is very aggressive in Furmark, which runs at only 110 W, while actual games reach up to around 130 W."

 

[Juventas]

I just realized that MSI completely removed the dragon logo from the card starting with the RTX 4000 series? Still on the box, but a nice change.

 

[Chrispy_]

It's really hard to shake the feeling that I'm looking at a $99 product here:
---

Here's MSI's cheapest, MSRP, reference-clocked model of the GTX 1060 at $249 in 2016.

and even a GTX 1650, criticised near-universally for being overpriced at the launch MSRP of $149 looks like a more expensive and complicated GPU:

 

[sLowEnd]

and even a GTX 1650, criticised near-universally for being overpriced at the launch MSRP of $149 looks like a more expensive and complicated GPU:
View attachment 302825

Gonna disagree with you on that one. The 1650 is down a power phase and a DP port compared to the 4060.

 

[Chrispy_]

Gonna disagree with you on that one. The 1650 is down a power phase and a DP port compared to the 4060.

Fair, but not really relevant. Here's your 1650S with an extra power phase for another $10 MSRP:

 

[sLowEnd]

Fair, but not really relevant. Here's your 1650S with an extra power phase for another $10 MSRP:

View attachment 302837

Mate, that is a 3(core)+1(vram) configuration, same as the 1650 you posted earlier.
Best to read the articles you borrow pictures from.

Zotac GeForce GTX 1650 Super Review

Zotac's GTX 1650 Super Twin Fan is only 16 cm long, which makes it a great choice for an SFF system or media PC. The card still offers plenty of gaming performance, exceeding the Radeon RX 580. Overclocking potential is outstanding; we managed to unlock over 10% in additional real-life performance.

www.techpowerup.com

 

[Chrispy_]

I counted four VRMs in a line, that's all the effort I put in. An extra phase adds, what, $0.75 to the cost of the card? It varies massively between different manufacturers and SKUs anyway and I've seen 2-phase 1650s, I've seen 6-phase 1650Tis, just as much as I expect to see 3-phase 4060 models once manufacturer's revise products outside of the watching eye of journalists on launch day; It's happened before and it'll happen again.

The point I'm making is that a short PCB, small-die, narrow-bus, halved-lanes, 4-VRAM package, cheap VRM design with a cheap cooler shouldn't be a $300 product, not when that was the realm of $100-150 a few generations ago. You don't have to agree that the 1650 is the perfect facsimile, it's just an approximate example that I plucked out of the back-catalogue. Pick another budget GPU from the last decade that matches your particular 4-phase criteria and I bet it's still nowhere near $300.

 

[W1zzard]

Summary video comparing all 10 cards

 

[Chrispy_]

Summary video comparing all 10 cards

Is that you? I had you pegged as a European rather than an American.

 

[W1zzard]

Is that you? I had you pegged as a European rather than an American.

Not me

 

[swaaye]

I counted four VRMs in a line, that's all the effort I put in. An extra phase adds, what, $0.75 to the cost of the card? It varies massively between different manufacturers and SKUs anyway and I've seen 2-phase 1650s, I've seen 6-phase 1650Tis, just as much as I expect to see 3-phase 4060 models once manufacturer's revise products outside of the watching eye of journalists on launch day; It's happened before and it'll happen again.

The point I'm making is that a short PCB, small-die, narrow-bus, halved-lanes, 4-VRAM package, cheap VRM design with a cheap cooler shouldn't be a $300 product, not when that was the realm of $100-150 a few generations ago. You don't have to agree that the 1650 is the perfect facsimile, it's just an approximate example that I plucked out of the back-catalogue. Pick another budget GPU from the last decade that matches your particular 4-phase criteria and I bet it's still nowhere near $300.

Yeah the product "stack" has been masterfully shifted up! But I suppose costs are higher all around now too.