NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 represent two distinct generations of NVIDIA's mainstream graphics lineup, separated by a significant architectural shift. The data reveals a clear overall winner in raw performance, but a closer look at individual benchmarks shows a more complex picture. The RTX 4060 secures 8 of 10 head-to-head victories, with the RTX 2060 SUPER taking only 2, yet the margins and specific test types where each card excels tell a story of specialization versus general-purpose advancement.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RTX 4060 asserts its dominance through sheer compute throughput. Its most decisive victory comes in the Passmark DirectX 11 test, where it scores 175 against the 2060 SUPER's 130, a commanding 25.7% lead. This pattern repeats across several key workloads. In the compute-focused Passmark GPU Compute test, the 4060 achieves 9213 points, outpacing the 2060 SUPER's 6721 by a substantial 27%. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark, a modern and demanding test, shows the 4060 ahead by 12.6% (2302 vs. 2011), indicating better performance in current-generation gaming scenarios. The Geekbench OpenCL scores reinforce this trend, with the 4060's 95057 points representing a 19% advantage over the 2060 SUPER's 76957.

The 4060's wins are not limited to raw compute. In the Passmark DirectX 12 test, it leads with 76 points versus 61, a 19.7% margin. Its advantage in the DirectX 9 test is narrower at 7.6% (236 vs. 218), suggesting the newer architecture still handles legacy APIs well. The 2D performance gap, measured by Passmark G2D, shows the 4060 leading by 17.6% (1037 vs. 854), which can impact desktop responsiveness and 2D application performance. The overall Passmark G3D score, a broad gaming metric, sees the 4060 ahead by 15.8% (19545 vs. 16462), solidifying its position as the faster gaming card in the majority of tests.

However, the RTX 2060 SUPER has its own notable victories that prevent a complete sweep. Its most striking win is in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where it achieves 77402 points against the 4060's 48643. This is a massive 59.1% advantage, suggesting the older Turing architecture has a significant optimization edge or driver maturity advantage in this specific Vulkan workload. The 2060 SUPER also wins the Passmark DirectX 10 test, scoring 111 versus 103, a 7.8% margin. These wins are isolated but demonstrate that the 2060 SUPER is not universally outclassed, particularly in API-specific scenarios where its hardware design may be better suited.

The deltaPct values in the head-to-head data reveal the magnitude of each card's respective strengths. The 4060's wins range from a narrow 7.6% to a wide 27%, while the 2060 SUPER's wins are either extremely large (59.1%) or modest (7.8%). This suggests the 4060 is consistently faster in most modern workloads, while the 2060 SUPER's victories are either anomalies or tied to specific legacy API paths.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental difference lies in the transition from Turing to Ada Lovelace. The RTX 2060 SUPER is built on TSMC's 12 nm process node, packing 10,800 million transistors into a 445 mm² die. In contrast, the RTX 4060 uses a 5 nm process, allowing 18,900 million transistors in a much smaller 159 mm² die. This results in a dramatic difference in transistor density: the 4060 achieves 118.9M / mm² versus the 2060 SUPER's 24.3M / mm². This density shift is the primary enabler of the 4060's higher performance despite its smaller physical footprint.

The core configurations reflect this generational leap. The RTX 4060 has 3072 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, compared to the 2060 SUPER's 2176 shading units, 136 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. While the 4060 has more shading units, it has fewer TMUs and ROPs. However, its clock speeds are dramatically higher: a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost of 2460 MHz versus the 2060 SUPER's 1470 MHz base and 1650 MHz boost. This clock advantage explains why the 4060's texture rate (236.2 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (118.1 GPixel/s) are higher than the 2060 SUPER's (224.4 GTexel/s and 105.6 GPixel/s, respectively), despite having fewer texture and pixel units.

Ray tracing and tensor core counts also shift. The 2060 SUPER has 34 RT cores and 272 tensor cores, while the 4060 has 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores. The lower count in the 4060 is offset by architectural improvements in Ada Lovelace, but the raw numbers suggest a different design philosophy. Compute performance, as measured by FP32, shows the 4060 at 15.11 TFLOPS versus the 2060 SUPER's 7.181 TFLOPS, a more than 2x increase. The FP16 capability also differs: the 2060 SUPER runs at 14.36 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the 4060 runs at 15.11 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), indicating a shift towards unified compute.

Memory configuration diverges significantly. Both cards have 8 GB of GDDR6, but the 2060 SUPER uses a 256-bit bus with a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s, while the 4060 uses a 128-bit bus with a bandwidth of 272.0 GB/s. The 2060 SUPER has a clear bandwidth advantage, which may explain its strong Vulkan performance. The memory clock also differs: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the 2060 SUPER versus 2125 MHz (17 Gbps effective) for the 4060, but the narrower bus limits the 4060's total bandwidth.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in raw compute performance?

A: The RTX 4060 is significantly faster. Its FP32 rating is 15.11 TFLOPS versus the RTX 2060 SUPER's 7.181 TFLOPS. This is reflected in the Passmark GPU Compute test, where the 4060 scores 9213 against 6721, a 27% difference.

Q: Why does the RTX 2060 SUPER win the Vulkan benchmark?

A: The data shows a 59.1% advantage for the 2060 SUPER in the Geekbench Vulkan test (77402 vs. 48643). This could be due to the 2060 SUPER's larger memory bandwidth (448.0 GB/s vs. 272.0 GB/s) or driver optimizations specific to its Turing architecture in this workload.

Q: Does the RTX 4060 have a higher memory bandwidth?

A: No. The RTX 2060 SUPER has a 256-bit memory bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4060 uses a 128-bit bus, limiting it to 272.0 GB/s. Despite the 4060's higher memory clock (17 Gbps effective vs. 14 Gbps), it cannot match the 2060 SUPER's bandwidth.

Q: How does the power consumption compare between the two cards?

A: The RTX 4060 has a TDP of 115 W, which is substantially lower than the RTX 2060 SUPER's 175 W. The 4060 also requires a smaller power supply (300 W suggested) compared to the 2060 SUPER (450 W suggested).

Q: Which card has a better overall benchmark average?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 18093, while the RTX 4060 has an average of 17639. However, this is misleading, as the 4060 wins 8 of the 10 head-to-head benchmarks. The average is skewed by the 2060 SUPER's massive Vulkan win.

Q: What are the key differences in the memory subsystem?

A: Both cards have 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, but the RTX 2060 SUPER uses a 256-bit interface with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RTX 4060 uses a 128-bit interface with 272.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 2060 SUPER has a 176 GB/s bandwidth advantage, which is a significant architectural difference.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | Turing | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 10,800 million | 18,900 million |

| Die Size | 445 mm² | 159 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1470 MHz | 1830 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1650 MHz | 2460 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 2125 MHz (17 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | 272.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2176 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 136 | 96 |

| ROPs | 64 | 48 |

| RT Cores | 34 | 24 |

| Tensor Cores | 272 | 96 |

| Pixel Rate | 105.6 GPixel/s | 118.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 224.4 GTexel/s | 236.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.181 TFLOPS | 15.11 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 14.36 TFLOPS (2:1) | 15.11 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 175 W | 115 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 12-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions | 229 mm / 9 inches long, 113 mm / 4.4 inches high, 35 mm / 1.4 inches wide | 240 mm / 9.4 inches long, 111 mm / 4.4 inches high, 40 mm / 1.6 inches wide |

| Release Date | 2019-07-08 | 2023-05-17 |

| Launch MSRP | 399 USD | 299 USD |

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4060 is the clear winner in most modern and compute-heavy workloads. Its victories in DirectX 11 (25.7% lead), DirectX 12 (19.7% lead), GPU Compute (27% lead), and 3DMark Steel Nomad (12.6% lead) demonstrate a strong advantage in current gaming APIs and general-purpose compute. Its higher FP32 throughput (15.11 TFLOPS vs. 7.181 TFLOPS) and boost clock (2460 MHz vs. 1650 MHz) drive these wins. For users focused on modern game titles, ray tracing workloads (despite fewer RT cores), and productivity tasks that leverage compute, the 4060 is the superior choice. Its lower TDP (115 W vs. 175 W) and lower suggested PSU (300 W vs. 450 W) also make it a more efficient option for system builders.

The RTX 2060 SUPER's wins are more specialized. Its 59.1% advantage in the Geekbench Vulkan test is its most significant, suggesting a strong niche for applications that rely heavily on Vulkan. The card's larger memory bandwidth (448.0 GB/s) is likely a contributing factor here. Its narrow 7.8% win in Passmark DirectX 10 also indicates it handles legacy APIs well. For users running specific Vulkan-based applications or older DirectX 10 titles, the 2060 SUPER may offer better performance. However, these are isolated cases, and the 2060 SUPER's overall benchmark average of 18093 is only slightly higher than the 4060's 17639, a difference skewed by its outlier Vulkan score.

The Verdict

For the vast majority of users, the data points decisively to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060. Winning 8 out of 10 benchmarks, including all the modern API tests and compute workloads, it offers a more balanced and future-proof performance profile. Its higher FP32 throughput (15.11 TFLOPS), higher clock speeds (2460 MHz boost), and lower power consumption (115 W TDP) make it a compelling upgrade. The 4060's wins in DirectX 11, DirectX 12, and 3DMark Steel Nomad are the metrics that matter most for contemporary gaming and application performance. Its lower launch MSRP of 299 USD (versus 399 USD for the 2060 SUPER) further reinforces its position as the better all-around choice, though pricing is not a factor in its performance.

The RTX 2060 SUPER is only recommended for the specific niche where it demonstrably outperforms: the Vulkan API. Its massive 59.1% lead in the Geekbench Vulkan test is a clear indicator of its strength in that area. If a user's primary workload is heavily dependent on Vulkan, the 2060 SUPER's superior memory bandwidth (448.0 GB/s) and optimized Turing architecture could provide a tangible benefit. Its win in DirectX 10 also makes it a potential choice for users with a library of older games. However, this is a narrow use case. The data shows the 2060 SUPER is not competitive in most other areas, and its higher power draw (175 W TDP) is a drawback. Users should pick the 4060 for general gaming, modern APIs, and compute tasks, and only consider the 2060 SUPER if their specific applications are Vulkan-bound.