NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER vs NVIDIA T400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data available for direct comparison places the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER in a commanding position. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 2060 SUPER scores 76,957, while the NVIDIA T400 manages 17,039. That is a delta of 351.7 percent, meaning the RTX 2060 SUPER is roughly four and a half times faster in raw compute throughput for this workload. The gap is not marginal; it is a generational chasm in execution resources.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story, and the margin is even starker. The RTX 2060 SUPER posts 77,402 in Geekbench Vulkan, against the T400’s 15,976. The delta here is 384.5 percent. Vulkan is a low-level API that exposes the hardware directly, so the difference in shading units, texture units, and memory bandwidth all contribute to this lopsided outcome. The RTX 2060 SUPER wins both head-to-head tests, with a perfect 2-0 record.

It is worth placing these scores in context using the database’s aggregate statistics. The RTX 2060 SUPER carries an average benchmark score of 18,093, while the T400 sits at 16,508. The RTX 2060 SUPER’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (18,159, delta of -0.4 percent) and the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (18,189, delta of -0.5 percent). Those deltas are tiny, indicating that the RTX 2060 SUPER is essentially neck-and-neck with those mobile and workstation parts. The T400, however, has a different peer group. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 (16,504, delta of 0 percent) and the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 (16,415, delta of 0.6 percent). The T400 is clustered with those cards, but they are all far below the RTX 2060 SUPER’s performance tier.

The percentile rankings reinforce this divide. The RTX 2060 SUPER sits in the 62nd percentile of all GPUs, while the T400 is in the 60th percentile. That two-point gap may seem small, but the absolute scores show that the RTX 2060 SUPER is delivering more than double the compute in the tests that matter. The T400’s percentile is buoyed by its efficiency and niche role, not by raw speed.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in Geekbench OpenCL, and by how much?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER wins decisively. It scores 76,957 versus the T400’s 17,039, a delta of 351.7 percent.

Q: Is the Vulkan performance gap similar to OpenCL?

A: Yes, and it is actually slightly larger. The RTX 2060 SUPER achieves 77,402 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the T400 scores 15,976. That represents a 384.5 percent advantage for the RTX 2060 SUPER.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 18,093, whereas the T400 has an average score of 16,508. The RTX 2060 SUPER leads by a substantial margin in this aggregate metric.

Q: How does each card compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER is within 0.4 to 1.6 percent of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile, AMD Radeon Pro 5700, AMD Radeon RX 460, and Intel Arc A770M. The T400 is within 0 to 0.9 percent of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2, AMD Radeon PRO W7500, NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell, and AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT.

Q: Does the T400 have any benchmark wins over the RTX 2060 SUPER?

A: No. In the recorded head-to-head tests, the RTX 2060 SUPER wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The T400 has zero wins in this comparison.

Q: What do the percentile rankings indicate?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER is in the 62nd percentile of all GPUs, while the T400 is in the 60th percentile. Despite the small percentile difference, the actual scores show a much larger performance gap in compute workloads.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on NVIDIA’s Turing architecture and use TSMC’s 12 nm process node, but they are fundamentally different silicon. The RTX 2060 SUPER uses the TU106 chip with 10,800 million transistors on a 445 mm² die. The T400 uses the TU117 chip, which packs 4,700 million transistors onto a 200 mm² die. That is less than half the transistor count and less than half the die area. The transistor density is close (24.3M per mm² for TU106 versus 23.5M per mm² for TU117), but the raw scale of TU106 dwarfs the smaller chip.

The compute resources diverge sharply. The RTX 2060 SUPER has 2,176 shading units, 136 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units. The T400 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This is a 5.7x difference in shader count and a 5.7x difference in TMUs. The ROP count is 4x higher on the RTX 2060 SUPER. These numbers directly explain the massive performance delta in the benchmarks.

Ray tracing and tensor cores are another major split. The RTX 2060 SUPER includes 34 RT cores and 272 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The T400 has no RT cores and no tensor cores. This makes the T400 a pure rasterization and compute card, lacking the specialized hardware that defines the GeForce 20-series. The RTX 2060 SUPER also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the T400 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Memory architecture is equally divergent. The RTX 2060 SUPER comes with 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The T400 has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing just 80.00 GB/s. The memory clock differs as well: the RTX 2060 SUPER runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), while the T400 runs at 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective). The bandwidth difference is a 5.6x advantage for the RTX 2060 SUPER, which is critical for high-resolution textures and compute workloads.

Power and physical design also separate these cards. The RTX 2060 SUPER has a TDP of 175 W, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and is a dual-slot card with a suggested PSU of 450 W. The T400 has a TDP of just 30 W, requires no external power connector, and is a single-slot card with a suggested PSU of 200 W. The RTX 2060 SUPER measures 229 mm in length, 113 mm in height, and 35 mm in width. The T400 has no recorded dimensions in the database. The display outputs differ too: the RTX 2060 SUPER offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C, while the T400 provides 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is the superior performer in every recorded benchmark. It wins both head-to-head tests with deltas exceeding 350 percent, and its average benchmark score of 18,093 is well above the T400’s 16,508. For any workload that relies on raw compute, shading, or memory bandwidth, the RTX 2060 SUPER is the clear choice. Its 8 GB GDDR6 memory with a 256-bit bus and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth is a massive advantage over the T400’s 2 GB and 80.00 GB/s.

The T400, however, serves a different purpose. Its 30 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of external power connectors make it suitable for low-profile or power-constrained environments. It has no RT or tensor cores, so it is not built for ray tracing or AI acceleration. The T400’s 384 shading units and 16 ROPs are sufficient for basic display output and light 2D workloads, but they are nowhere near the RTX 2060 SUPER’s 2,176 shading units and 64 ROPs.

Users who need gaming performance, content creation, or any GPU-accelerated compute should select the RTX 2060 SUPER. Users who require a minimal-power, single-slot card for basic multi-display setups or legacy workstation tasks might consider the T400, but the performance sacrifice is extreme. The recorded data shows no scenario in which the T400 outperforms the RTX 2060 SUPER.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER | NVIDIA T400 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | TU106 | TU117 |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 12 nm |

| Transistors | 10,800 million | 4,700 million |

| Die Size | 445 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.3M / mm² | 23.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1470 MHz | 420 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1650 MHz | 1425 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | 80.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2176 | 384 |

| TMUs | 136 | 24 |

| ROPs | 64 | 16 |

| RT Cores | 34 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 272 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 105.6 GPixel/s | 22.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 224.4 GTexel/s | 34.20 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 7.181 TFLOPS | 1,094.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 14.36 TFLOPS (2:1) | 2.189 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 175 W | 30 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 200 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

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

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2019-07-08 | 2021-05-05 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

| Launch MSRP | 399 USD | Not recorded |