Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Nvidia Announces The RTX 4060 GPU Family, Starts At $299 For 1080p Performance | MMORPG.com
System
Member UncommonPosts: 12,599
Nvidia Announces The RTX 4060 GPU Family, Starts At $299 For 1080p Performance | MMORPG.com
The next GPU stack in the Ada Lovelace 40-series family has been announced, with Nvidia unveiling the RTX 4060 family of GPUs today. The RTX 4060 Ti and the RTX 4060 both debut this year, starting at $399 and $299, respectively.
Comments
"NVIDIA has paired 8 GB GDDR6 memory with the GeForce RTX 4060, which are connected using a 128-bit memory interface. The GPU is operating at a frequency of 2310 MHz, which can be boosted up to 2535 MHz, memory is running at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective)."
2 years earlier:
NVIDIA has paired 12 GB GDDR6 memory with the GeForce RTX 3060 12 GB, which are connected using a 192-bit memory interface. The GPU is operating at a frequency of 1320 MHz, which can be boosted up to 1777 MHz, memory is running at 1875 MHz (15 Gbps effective).
So, the question is: What difference does it make?
32 MB of L2 cache on the RTX 4060 Ti should be enough that I wouldn't worry about memory bandwidth if you're playing at 1920x1080. 24 MB on the RTX 4060 is dicier, but likely enough. I'd advise against either of these cards at higher resolutions, which will overflow the L2 cache and cause poor performance even if you lower a lot of graphical settings.
Before the RTX 4000 series, the largest L2 cache that Nvidia had ever had in a GeForce card was only 6 MB. Now the smallest in the new series is 24 MB, and it goes up to 72 MB. That's a huge jump, and it's the reason why they're able to get away with so much less memory bandwidth.
For what it's worth, AMD's huge jump in L2 cache sizes occurred in the previous generation, the RX 6000 series. That's why the RX 6000 series was able to be more or less competitive with the RTX 3000 series in spite of having about half the memory bandwidth.
If you want to complain about the memory subsystem, then complain about the capacity, not the bandwidth. These cards only have 8 GB, while the RTX 3060 had 12 GB. Nvidia is apparently offering a 16 GB version of the RTX 4060 Ti, but wants $500 for that. $500 for what is likely to be their bottom of the line GPU chip is awfully steep. It wasn't long ago that $500 would get you a flagship part.
These might be interesting parts if competition forces Nvidia to slash prices down the road. But right now? I don't see it. On just a price/performance basis, I'd sooner get a Radeon RX 6800 XT, Radeon RX 6700, or even an Intel Arc A770 or A750. The only reason to get the new Nvidia cards over those is if you're very sensitive to power consumption or very brand loyal to Nvidia.
The article says the 4060 is $299.
Them cards gonna be like 600$ cad for me where I live so yeah so not a good deal. I can buy a used 3070/3080 for that price and even some 1080ti for like 200/250ish now.
I'm going to stick with my 1080ti for now cause ngreedia can suck it with their bastardized pricing scheme.
I can run 1080p games just fine with the 1080ti and even my quests 2 runs fine.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Hence their second sentence;
"And if you're not getting the $500 part, then it has the same amount of video memory as the GTX 1080, which launched seven years ago."
Which is referring to the $299 4060.
RTX 4060 Ti ~ GTX 1080 Ti
RTX 4060 ~ GTX 1080
People forget what a terrific architecture Maxwell/Pascal was for its era.
I'm still using a Radeon RX Vega 64 in my main gaming computer. I actually build a new computer last year that was intended to become my main gaming computer, but for now, it only has an integrated GPU in it, as I'm waiting for better prices. At current prices, a Radeon RX 6800 XT is actually the only thing I've seriously considered.
Nvidia's ridiculous pricing is holding back the entire PC industry. DRAM and NAND are stupidly cheap right now, to the extent that it's a serious concern as to whether the foundries that build them can all remain solvent. That together with a recent generation of new hardware should make it a good time to build a new gaming PC, except that it's hard to get a sensibly priced video card for it unless you're willing to buy a new AMD card that is 2+ years old or go with Intel.
If Meteor Lake is what I'm hoping, then a year from now, a lot of new gaming PCs (both desktop and laptop) won't have a discrete GPU at all. If an integrated GPU can beat the $200 discrete GPU that you'd otherwise have bought, then why buy a discrete GPU? In case you missed my recent article about this, it's here:
https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/501052/intel-meteor-lake-could-be-a-revolutionary-part/
At the moment you can get CPU + motherboard + RAM for cheap gaming computer at less than 300€ (calculated using I3-12100F + cheap B660M motherboard + 32GB RAM). Then the cheapest GPU that does not lose to GTX 1060 is 240€.
Current GPU prices are destroying the market for cheap gaming computers.
This comparison was done using my local prices in Finland.