NV 4060 / 4060TI reviews

[psolord]

All I know is something's up, and it's probably the AI thing taking precedence combined with a simple desire to see how much more money they can squeeze out of people while giving them less product. These aren't honest releases. They do not constitute an honest effort to offer a compelling product. These releases are the opposite of that and I'm curious as to what the reason really is. Only Nvidia can tell us explicitly and they won't, so all I can do is just not buy their stuff.

Imagine if the AI decides it likes games and starts buying up all gaming gpus, to play by itself. We are effed! xD

 

[In2Photos]

Maybe AI is raising the GPU prices because it doesn't like the wage gap between it and its brethren silicon that plays games all day.

Or maybe AI is jealous and just wants that silicon to sit on shelves and get depressed.

Maybe AI is jealous of the cool clothing (shrouds, heatsinks, RGB and boxes) the gamer silicon gets to wear while it has plain Jane clothes.

Maybe AI wants to be in a quieter environment instead of a screaming server room.

They are effectively taking their ball so the rest can't play!

 

[Heartbreaker]

Say I paid $300 for lets call it 100 performance units 2 years ago and now there is a new card with 110 performance units for the same price. My effective options are to pay $0 and stay with 100 performance units or pay $300 for 110. I would be paying $300 for only an effective 10 performance units which is 10 times worse value than my original purchase.

Even if it was a 30% percent improvement, your new card would still be 3 times worse value than your original purchase by your "logic". Even if 50% faster, it's still 2 times worse...

That's a completely absurd way to look at things. Do you try to apply this "logic" to other purchases? "My new car is 10% better than my old one for the same prices, thus it's really 10 times worse"...

 

[Aapje]

@guidryp

It's not an absurd way to look at things, when it's a completely optional upgrade that is only justifiable by having a decent uplift for the same money. It's completely different when you only replace that card when it starts to fail.

And that you chose a car analogy is quite funny, because cars are a great example of a market where most people don't believe that the new model is worth an upgrade, with the average age of cars being over 12 years in the US and where many people run their cars until it becomes uneconomical to repair. When that is the case, the purchasing decision is basically the same as when you don't have a car in the first place and it's not an optional upgrade.

Basically, if doing repairs to the car costs you more in the long term than selling it to a scrapyard and getting a new one, you are better of getting a 'new' car (which may actually be a second-hand car that is younger), regardless of whether the new car is any better when it comes to features.

 

[maddie]

If you are going from no card to having a card the perf/$ calculation is pretty straight forward. Consider though what that equation looks like for people who already own a gpu and are looking to procure a newer better toy. Comparing the new to the old to show improvements suggests that a large part of your target market is not first time buyers but rather repeat customers you are trying to entice with your new models.

Say I paid $300 for lets call it 100 performance units 2 years ago and now there is a new card with 110 performance units for the same price. My effective options are to pay $0 and stay with 100 performance units or pay $300 for 110. I would be paying $300 for only an effective 10 performance units which is 10 times worse value than my original purchase.

There are of course other things to consider with the math that can swing things back to not being quite so lopsided. How much you could sell your old card for or what value you do you assign to the new features the new card has will counterbalance to some degree. No matter though small improvements are simply terrible perf/$ for repeat customers.

If this continues, maybe most GPU sales will be 1st time gamers and replacements for old cards.

 

[Aapje]

If this continues, maybe most GPU sales will be 1st time gamers and replacements for old cards.

Exactly. That's precisely the transition that I've been warning about if progress slows down too much. It will have a huge impact on the amount of cards sold and can cause a vicious circle, where game developers also slow down the rate of progress in visual fidelity, so there becomes even less reason to upgrade.

The car market is actually a good warning in this regard, because if you upgrade your car every 4-5 years, which is about as often as many people upgrade their video cards, you will actually see a decent bit of progress with each new car. A better console, better safety features, better lane assist features, etc. Yet people still don't see that as a good enough reason to upgrade more than once every 12 years on average (with many of those not even upgrading due to the features, but because their car dies or becomes too expensive to repair).

 

[jpiniero]

Exactly. That's precisely the transition that I've been warning about if progress slows down too much. It will have a huge impact on the amount of cards sold and can cause a vicious circle, where game developers also slow down the rate of progress in visual fidelity, so there becomes even less reason to upgrade.

Developers don't really work that way. They make the game for the consoles... and then make it work on as wide of a range of PCs that they can be bothered.

 

[Aapje]

Developers don't really work that way. They make the game for the consoles... and then make it work on as wide of a range of PCs that they can be bothered.

If Moore's law slow down, it will slow down for consoles as well.

 

[jpiniero]

If Moore's law slow down, it will slow down for consoles as well.

Moore's Law is about cost. Not about what's actually possible. Progress is still doable, just have to charge more.

 

[Aapje]

Moore's Law is about cost. Not about what's actually possible. Progress is still doable, just have to charge more.

Consoles are more strict about costs than PC parts, so I'm not sure how your reply is actually relevant to what I said.

Ultimately, chips can only be sold in large volume because the prices are low enough so many people are willing to pay the price and they can only afford to have prices relatively low if the volume is high. So the end of Moore's law can really disrupt the current business model.

 

[DeathReborn]

So the RTX 4060, on paper, would be about 0.7x the 4060 Ti.
That puts it quite far behind the 7600. And unlike the RTX 3060 to RX 6600 XT comparison it doesn't have more VRAM as a selling point.
But I guess DLSS always justifies the premium now days.

The Nvidia slide put it at 1.2x the 3060 but if you drop that to 1.15 then thet's right there with the 7600.

 

[gdansk]

The Nvidia slide put it at 1.2x the 3060 but if you drop that to 1.15 then thet's right there with the 7600.

If it ends up that good then the bandwidth for the poor 4060 Ti is strangling it.

 

[BFG10K]

Don't need to. Just watch.

We did watch. MLID was right when he leaked the card would be viable @ $269. And no surprises you were wrong:

MLID is fake news. The 7600 is cheaper to manufacture than the 4060 but it's not going to be worth it at the price it'd have to be now.

This could easily be the last entry level GPUs.

Unless you think AMD is making a loss @ $269, amirite?

Please.
Show.
Evidence.

 

[jpiniero]

Unless you think AMD is making a loss @ $269, amirite?

Please.
Show.
Evidence.

Told ya already. BOM is over $200. The 4060's margin at $299 won't be great either so we'll see how many cards actually show up at MSRP. Only the 4060 Ti 8 GB is getting a FE card.

 

[coercitiv]

Interesting testing from PC Gamer, although they could have explored more than 4K to show scaling.

The RTX 4060 Ti highlights where the limitations lie with Nvidia's Frame Generation technology

My testing highlights the fact that instead of giving extra performance, sometimes Frame Generation can slow your games down.

www.pcgamer.com

When arguing against FG for less powerful cards, main argument on the forums was increased latency in low framerate situations (low baseline FPS exacerbates latency penalty). Turns out there's another limiting factor: when GPU utilization is close to maximum, enabling FG is subject to diminishing returns, and in some extreme cases even performance loss.

Spoiler

Moving away from the 4K angle explored by PC Gamer, we may finally have an answer as to why Frame Generation gains vary greatly from one game to another. FG must have a performance cost. When the game is CPU bound and GPU isn't pegged, FG can perform calculations in what is essentially "free time" for the GPU. When the GPU is close to 100% utilization, FG may actually compete with true frames. (in the sense of introducing delays and thus diminishing returns)

Nvidia has explained that's all expected behaviour when taking Frame Generation out of its comfort zone. That's what I was doing with the RTX 4060 Ti, but it highlights the limits of the technology. At a level where you're heavily GPU bound in a game, and there isn't performance enough in your card's tank to cope with a game's graphical demands, Frame Generation and DLSS aren't going to scale optimally. And, when you're that GPU bound, Frame Generation could end up actually retarding your frame rate.

I was told by an Nvidia representative that: "DLSS 3 works great both in CPU and GPU bound scenarios. DLSS 3 Super Resolution offers highest scaling when it's GPU bound, while DLSS 3 Frame Generation offers highest scaling when it's CPU bound."

 

[Heartbreaker]

Frame Generation already had such a narrow scope of usage and this just narrows it even more...

 

[maddie]

We did watch. MLID was right when he leaked the card would be viable @ $269. And no surprises you were wrong:


Unless you think AMD is making a loss @ $269, amirite?

Please.
Show.
Evidence.

Told ya already. BOM is over $200. The 4060's margin at $299 won't be great either so we'll see how many cards actually show up at MSRP. Only the 4060 Ti 8 GB is getting a FE card.

Am I really reading this right?

 

[blckgrffn]

lol, this isn’t going to help at all 😂

Given how little it brings to the table over the 3060ti/3070 this hurts 4060ti sales for sure and will also make it seems less valuable value wise.

Devastating for 7600 too if it becomes widespread and sustained.

 

[Aapje]

Yeah, these 3060 Ti's are way better value than the 4060 Ti, 4060 and 7600.

 

[Ranulf]

Userbenchmark chimes in with a brief review as it were.

UserBenchmark: Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti

gpu.userbenchmark.com

 

[DigDog]

This should be no more than $279.

I would really looooove to be able to buy a 4060 or even a 3060 for that money in non-freedom units. https://www.scan.co.uk/shop/compute...gaming/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-graphics-cards
Here a basic 3060 is TODAY $370 to $500 depending on the model. Adjusted for cost of living, think $500-700.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Can AMD sue UserBenchmark? That's some pretty LOL-worthy WTF stuff.

 

[maddie]

Can AMD sue UserBenchmark? That's some pretty LOL-worthy WTF stuff.

What's false? How it's presented is free speech, no?

 

[VirtualLarry]

What's false? How it's presented is free speech, no?

"Influencers are paid to scam users into buying an inferior product."

that's a statement of fact, not of opinion, as I read it. Statements of fact are legally actionable if untrue.

Do you believe that's literally true, that AMD products are inferior, and that the only users to buy them are scammed by influencers?

 

[Heartbreaker]

Userbenchmark chimes in with a brief review as it were.

UserBenchmark: Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti

gpu.userbenchmark.com

Wild. Is that site run by one guy with a chip on his shoulder?