NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains only one recorded benchmark score for the RTX 4010, and no benchmark entries for the RTX 5060 GB205. Direct head-to-head comparisons are therefore impossible from the measured data. The RTX 4010 scores 2893 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it at the 18th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are separated by less than one percent: the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB scores 2907 (0.5% higher), the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF scores 2910 (0.6% higher), the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB scores 2913 (0.7% higher), and the Quadro P600 scores 2923 (1% higher). This places the RTX 4010 within a tight cluster of similarly performing cards, all within one percentage point of each other.

For the RTX 5060 GB205, the database records no benchmark scores, no average score, and no rival comparisons. Its percentile ranking of 50 is listed, but without a measured baseline, that position cannot be verified against actual workload results. The data gap means any performance comparison between these two cards must rely on architectural specifications rather than direct measurements.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent entirely different generations of NVIDIA design. The RTX 4010 uses the GA107 chip built on Samsung's 8 nm process, housing 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. The transistor density works out to 43.5 million per square millimeter. The RTX 5060 GB205 uses the GB205 chip fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm node, containing 31,100 million transistors across a 263 mm² die, for a density of 118.3 million per square millimeter. The newer process packs more than double the transistor density into a die that is only 31.5% larger by area.

Architecture generations diverge sharply. The RTX 4010 belongs to the Ampere architecture within the GeForce 40 generation, while the RTX 5060 GB205 uses Blackwell 2.0 within the GeForce 50 generation. The RTX 4010's predecessor is GeForce 30, and its successor is GeForce 50. The RTX 5060 GB205's predecessor is GeForce 40, and its successor is GeForce 60. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature parity exists.

Core counts differ by a wide margin. The RTX 4010 has 768 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The RTX 5060 GB205 has 3840 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. That is a 5x difference in shading units, a 5x difference in TMUs, and a 3x difference in ROPs. Ray tracing cores number 6 on the RTX 4010 versus 30 on the RTX 5060 GB205, a 5x gap. Tensor cores follow the same pattern: 24 on the older card, 120 on the newer one, again a 5x difference.

Clock speeds also move substantially. The RTX 4010 runs at a 1417 MHz base and 1762 MHz boost. The RTX 5060 GB205 runs at a 2280 MHz base and 2497 MHz boost. The boost clock advantage for the newer card is 735 MHz, or roughly 41.7% higher. Memory clocks differ even more: the RTX 4010 uses 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective transfer, while the RTX 5060 GB205 uses 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective. The newer card's effective memory speed is more than double.

Memory subsystems are in different classes. The RTX 4010 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 5060 GB205 has 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s. The bandwidth advantage is 4.67x. Pixel and texture rates scale accordingly. The RTX 4010 reaches 28.19 GPixel/s and 42.29 GTexel/s. The RTX 5060 GB205 reaches 119.9 GPixel/s and 299.6 GTexel/s, which is 4.25x and 7.08x higher, respectively. FP32 and FP16 compute both sit at 2.706 TFLOPS for the RTX 4010, while the RTX 5060 GB205 delivers 19.18 TFLOPS in both formats. The newer card is 7.09x faster in raw compute.

Power and physical design reflect the performance gap. The RTX 4010 has a 50 W TDP, requires no power connectors, fits a single-slot form factor, and needs a 250 W suggested power supply. The RTX 5060 GB205 has a 145 W TDP, uses one 8-pin connector, occupies a dual-slot form factor, and needs a 300 W suggested power supply. The RTX 4010 measures 163 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The RTX 5060 GB205 measures 241 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The newer card is substantially larger in every dimension except width, which the older card does not specify.

Bus interfaces also differ. The RTX 4010 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RTX 5060 GB205 uses PCIe 5.0 x8. Display outputs differ in type and count: the RTX 4010 has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the RTX 5060 GB205 has one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. Release dates are separated by roughly two years: the RTX 4010 launched on 2024-04-15, and the RTX 5060 GB205 launches on 2026-05-31.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4010 wins in power efficiency and installation flexibility. Its 50 W TDP means it can run without any power connectors, which suits compact systems or upgrades where power delivery is limited. The single-slot design and 163 mm length allow placement in small chassis. The four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs provide multi-display capability in a low-profile footprint. The 250 W suggested power supply requirement means most existing systems can accommodate it without a PSU upgrade.

The RTX 4010 also holds a narrow but measurable edge in the database's nearest-rival comparisons. It sits 0.5% below the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB, 0.6% below the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF, 0.7% below the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB, and 1% below the Quadro P600. These deltas are small enough that the RTX 4010 is effectively within the same performance tier as those cards in the one recorded benchmark, despite its much lower core count and memory bandwidth. That result indicates the 3DMark Steel Nomad workload may not be heavily sensitive to the specifications that separate these cards.

The RTX 5060 GB205 wins on every performance-related specification. Compute throughput is 7.09x higher. Texture rate is 7.08x higher. Pixel rate is 4.25x higher. Memory bandwidth is 4.67x higher. Memory capacity is double. The core configuration, clock speeds, and memory subsystem all point to substantially higher workload capability. The RTX 5060 GB205 also carries a launch MSRP of 299 USD, which is the only listed price in the comparison.

The RTX 5060 GB205 supports newer display standards with one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1b outputs, compared to the older mini-DisplayPort 1.4a standard on the RTX 4010. The PCIe 5.0 x8 interface doubles the per-lane bandwidth available versus the RTX 4010's PCIe 4.0 x8, which matters for systems with newer platforms.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear separation of roles. The RTX 4010 is a low-power, single-slot card that delivers a measured 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2893, placing it at the 18th percentile and within 1% of several higher-tier cards in the database. Its 50 W TDP, connectorless power design, and compact dimensions make it suitable for systems where space and power budgets are tight. The RTX 5060 GB205, by contrast, offers no measured benchmark scores but presents specifications that dominate the RTX 4010 across every compute, memory, and output category. Its 7.09x FP32 advantage, 4.67x bandwidth advantage, and 5x core count advantage indicate a completely different performance class.

For users constrained by physical size, power delivery, or thermal limits, the RTX 4010 is the only sensible choice from the recorded data. For users who need maximum throughput and can accommodate a dual-slot, 145 W card with a 300 W PSU recommendation, the RTX 5060 GB205 is the stronger option on paper. The absence of benchmark results for the RTX 5060 GB205 means its real-world performance cannot be confirmed from the database, but every architectural indicator points to a decisive advantage. The RTX 4010's 18th percentile ranking and its proximity to cards like the RTX 4060 Ti variants suggest it competes at a mainstream level, while the RTX 5060 GB205's 50th percentile listing, even without measured scores, implies a mid-pack position that should outperform the older card by a wide margin.

FAQ

Q: How does the RTX 4010 compare to the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB in the recorded benchmark?

A: The RTX 4010 scores 2893 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, while the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB scores 2907. The RTX 4010 is 0.5% slower, a difference within measurement noise.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The RTX 4010 has 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth from 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. The RTX 5060 GB205 has 448.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus. The newer card delivers 4.67x more bandwidth.

Q: Can the RTX 4010 run without external power connectors?

A: Yes. The RTX 4010 has a 50 W TDP, lists "None" for power connectors, and requires a 250 W suggested power supply. The RTX 5060 GB205 requires one 8-pin connector and a 300 W suggested power supply.

Q: What are the core count differences?

A: The RTX 4010 has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, 16 ROPs, 6 RT cores, and 24 tensor cores. The RTX 5060 GB205 has 3840 shading units, 120 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 30 RT cores, and 120 tensor cores. The newer card has 5x more shading units, TMUs, and RT cores, and 3x more ROPs.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which card has a faster boost clock?

A: The RTX 5060 GB205 boosts at 2497 MHz, compared to 1762 MHz for the RTX 4010. That is a 735 MHz advantage for the newer card.

Specification Differences

| Specification | RTX 4010 | RTX 5060 GB205 |

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

| Process node | 8 nm (Samsung) | 5 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 8,700 million | 31,100 million |

| Die size | 200 mm² | 263 mm² |

| Transistor density | 43.5M / mm² | 118.3M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1417 MHz | 2280 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1762 MHz | 2497 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz, 28 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR7 |

| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 768 | 3840 |

| TMUs | 24 | 120 |

| ROPs | 16 | 48 |

| RT cores | 6 | 30 |

| Tensor cores | 24 | 120 |

| Pixel rate | 28.19 GPixel/s | 119.9 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 42.29 GTexel/s | 299.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 compute | 2.706 TFLOPS | 19.18 TFLOPS |

| FP16 compute | 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1) | 19.18 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 50 W | 145 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 300 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 5.0 x8 |

| Display outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |

| Length | 163 mm | 241 mm |

| Height | 69 mm | 111 mm |

| Width | Not specified | 40 mm |

| Release date | 2024-04-15 | 2026-05-31 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 299 USD |