NV 4060 / 4060TI reviews

[MrTeal]

Hell not even 1080p and DLSS helping for the lack of Vram

After a decade or more of generally pretty comparable IQ between cards where we could just compare performance in FPS, we're going hard into territory where FPS numbers on their own are becoming meaningless again.

Sure you can get decent framerates at 1080p Ultra with a neutered bus and not enough VRAM. Just don't bother loading the textures! Want even more frames? Just interpolate them.

It's going to be a nightmare to benchmark going forward and low effort reviews will screw it up constantly. You can't just fix settings for different runs because you need to check for IQ differences with the same setting not only between the different vendors like you did in the 9800 Pro and FX days, but between cards within the same lineup. Then you have to figure out for to report on stuff like DLSS3, where 100 FPS with DLSS3 on might be better than 60 with it off, but it's certainly not as good as another card that gets 100 without Frame Gen.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

It's a slugfest over in the TPU comment section, man users there are not happy with Wizz's "Highly Recommended" tag (and for good reason).

Guess no one wants to anger the green giant and risk review samples...

 

[DAPUNISHER]

It's a slugfest over in the TPU comment section, man users there are not happy with Wizz's "Highly Recommended" tag (and for good reason).

Guess no one wants to anger the green giant and risk review samples...

I think you are right. Nvidia is exerting heavy pressure to follow the script.


As bad as that is, Jayz2cents shilled so hard, the video was taken down. Jay is out due to surgery, and the boyz took shall we say, full editorial direction, from Nvidia.💩
Any time a reviewer compares it to the 2060 super, it's editorial direction provided by Nvidia. That is their direct marketing pitch for all of these overpriced cards- 40 vs 20.

The deleted video is on PCMR-

https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/13punp6

Jay from the hurt locker with a damage control response-

He should have left it at "We have to do better." He is on meds so I'll cut him a break this time.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

It's a slugfest over in the TPU comment section, man users there are not happy with Wizz's "Highly Recommended" tag (and for good reason).

Guess no one wants to anger the green giant and risk review samples...

Gamers Nexus and Hardware Unboxed crapped all over this trash thankfully.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

It's disappointing to watch Bryan shill this hard. To borrow Zoomer vernacular - This is cringe

Quick notes if you don't want to skim through it. In the end, he tries to use economics to shamelessly pimp it as a great value if it were $349. The entire review is as bad as Jayz was. Nvidia script being adhered to, including pulling the 2060 super out of mothballs as instructed. Useless bar charts too. There appear to be issues with DLSS and fake frames in Returnal, no mention of stuff like that either. Tries to tell some dumb story at the end, not sitting through that dreck.

 

[coercitiv]

It's disappointing to watch Bryan shill this hard. To borrow Zoomer vernacular - This is cringe

Read the comments to his review, every youtuber/reviewer who decides to just stick to the script is risking loss of viewership right now. His audience is polite but firmly opposed to the rationale of the review.

 

[amenx]

Its basically a 4050.... @ $400.

 

[AtenRa]

Nice review from Daniel, the card would have been excellent with 16GB at $349 to $399

 

[moonbogg]

Nice review from Daniel, the card would have been excellent with 16GB at $349 to $399

$350-400 is a terrible price for this card because it performs like a 3060Ti, and $400 was the msrp for the 3060Ti. But It performs like a 3060Ti, and $400 was the msrp for the 3060Ti. But It performs like a 3060Ti, and $400 was the msrp for the 3060Ti. But It performs like a 3060Ti, and $400 was the msrp for the 3060Ti.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

For $349 with 16GB of ram, the performance per watt, with fairly compact models with a single 8 pin? I'd buy it.

 

[Timorous]

$350-400 is a terrible price for this card because it performs like a 3060Ti, and $400 was the msrp for the 3060Ti. But It performs like a 3060Ti, and $400 was the msrp for the 3060Ti. But It performs like a 3060Ti, and $400 was the msrp for the 3060Ti. But It performs like a 3060Ti, and $400 was the msrp for the 3060Ti.

If you make it 16GB with 22gbps VRAM and price it at $350 then you have a decent card. Alternatively if you keep it as is, price it at $299 and call it the 4060 then you also have a decent card.

When doing the latter the $400 card could be a cut AD104 die with around 40SMs running at lower clocks paired with 12GB of VRAM. That would also make for a good 4060Ti with a good bump over the 3060Ti along with a VRAM increase and performance in and around the 3070 but with longer legs.

It is not like NV had no choice in the matter, they just chose really poorly.

 

[Aapje]

Read the comments to his review, every youtuber/reviewer who decides to just stick to the script is risking loss of viewership right now. His audience is polite but firmly opposed to the rationale of the review.

I disagree that the TechYesCity guy is just sticking to the Nvidia script. He's got two big hobby horses: efficiency and money supply issues.

It's logical that he likes the card for being very efficient, which is what he cares about a lot. And his money supply theories result in him believing that our money is worth a lot less, so $400 is a fair price for a x050 Ti-level style card now.

Neither of these talking points are what Nvidia wants people to focus on. They want you to go: "DLSS 3 means performance times two, woah" and "look how much faster it is than a 2060 (thanks to the gains made by Ampere)."

 

[Ranulf]

I think Bryan at TYC is wrong on his econ points but I get where is going with it. I knew where he was going with the housing cost comparison as soon as he started it but as his chapter notes call it "OT" it really doesn't work for consumer goods. Too many factors involved there to just say it is the money supply changes and justify inflation of cost but the inflation of a x50 card to a x60 one and on up the product stack. This is especially true when it is barely faster or not than the previous generation product.

Maybe Nvidia's margins have gone down but they still have to deal with the market as it has become. Or not, and not sell cards much at all. Sell them for AI or 3D modeling or science research. Nevermind that the pre econ crash/crypto era prices were already mega inflated and had to come down. Inflation has been used to justify price increases for ten years or more now in gpu's. That or research costs for ray tracing. Which, is not my problem as a customer.

 

[Ranulf]

Digital Foundry weighs in... no review yet due to a backlog but some data they share.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1661022128584675329

 

[In2Photos]

I couldn't watch the TYC video. In fact I don't watch most of his reviews. His scripts don't follow his slides, so you practically have to pause the video to read the chart, then unpause it to listen to what he is saying. But the biggest issue is that my eyes bleed looking at his charts. His color choices are terrible! Red background with green red and purple bars. What?!?! I stopped after the first chart.

PC centric also posted a second live video saying that his review video was wrong too.

Guys, I Messed Up...

⭐ PC Centric Mousemat https://pccentric.storeCorsair 2000D PC Case: https://locally.link/KX8g (Amazon)GIGABYTE B650I Motherboard: https://locally.link/7Bdy (...

www.youtube.com

 

[igor_kavinski]

You know things are worse than bad when Nvidia shills AKA DF call out a Geforce for being a regression compared to previous gen. Well done, nKidia



6750 XT would beat a 3070 here. All three nWorthless cards should be relegated to bargain bins in the local Walmart.

 

[BFG10K]

I'm not joking when I say AMD could easily pull out of the dGPU business if things don't improve.

Again, show us. Show us a BOM, manufacturing blueprints or accounting financials with the cost of these cards. Because physical analysis is suggesting they're dirt cheap to make.

Let's just do VRAM:

DRAMeXchange - World leading DRAM and NAND Flash market research firm, with more than a decade of most authoritative database

DRAM, NAND Flash, SSD, Module and Memory card, and provides market research on spot and contract prices, daily news, market views and reports, and monthly datasheets of semiconductor industry.集邦科技

www.dramexchange.com

8GB GDDR6 costs ~$27, yet NV charges $100. So they could easily shave $50 off the card and still have 85% VRAM profit. 85% profit won't be "putting anyone out of business".

 

[jpiniero]

8GB GDDR6 costs ~$27, yet NV charges $100. So they could easily shave $50 off the card and still have 85% VRAM profit. 85% profit won't be "putting anyone out of business".

That has to be slow GDDR6 or inaccurate data. The speeds they are using are probally much closer to like $20/chip. Higher speeds cost more, 2 GB costs more (although not 2x)

You'll see it if AMD releases a 16 GB GDDR6 N33. They probably won't though since it'd also likely have to be an extra 100 bucks. The price difference is why AMD had penciled it in as being the 7700.

 

[BFG10K]

That has to be slow GDDR6 or inaccurate data.

Show.
Us.
The.
Proof.

The speeds they are using are probally much closer to like $20/chip. Higher speeds cost more, 2 GB costs more (although not 2x)

Show.
Us.
The.
Proof.

 

[jpiniero]

Show.
Us.
The.
Proof

Don't need to. Just watch.

 

[Glo.]

That has to be slow GDDR6 or inaccurate data. The speeds they are using are probally much closer to like $20/chip. Higher speeds cost more, 2 GB costs more (although not 2x)

You'll see it if AMD releases a 16 GB GDDR6 N33. They probably won't though since it'd also likely have to be an extra 100 bucks. The price difference is why AMD had penciled it in as being the 7700.

You pay for capacity. You pay on a "per/GB" basis. Of course higher clocked memory is going to be more expensive, however...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1661358940473659392

... AMD is DOWNCLOCKING 20 Gbps to 18 Gbps GDDR6 chips.

Cause they like to pay more to deliver less? Or its because those are the only available chips on the market?

 

[Ajay]

Don't need to. Just watch.

Watch what??

 

[igor_kavinski]

Watch what??

Whatever's gonna unfold.

 

[maddie]

That has to be slow GDDR6 or inaccurate data. The speeds they are using are probally much closer to like $20/chip. Higher speeds cost more, 2 GB costs more (although not 2x)

You'll see it if AMD releases a 16 GB GDDR6 N33. They probably won't though since it'd also likely have to be an extra 100 bucks. The price difference is why AMD had penciled it in as being the 7700.

Just how many orifices are there to pull these "facts" from? I'm losing count.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Just how many orifices are there to pull these "facts" from? I'm losing count.

Well, every skin pore is kind of a microscopic orifice