NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain any recorded head-to-head benchmark results between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 and the NVIDIA N1 20SM. Both entries show zero benchmark scores, zero wins for either side, and no nearest rival data. Consequently, a direct numerical performance comparison cannot be derived from the recorded measurements. What can be analyzed are the architectural and specification differences that would influence performance in various workloads, based solely on the data present in the database.

The RTX 4060 AD106 delivers a higher FP32 throughput of 15.11 TFLOPS, compared to the N1 20SM's 12.01 TFLOPS. This represents a 25.8% advantage for the discrete GeForce part in raw single-precision compute. The RTX 4060 also operates at a significantly higher base clock of 1830 MHz versus 741 MHz for the N1, and a higher boost clock of 2460 MHz versus 2346 MHz. These clock advantages contribute directly to the FP32 gap. However, the N1 20SM counters with a substantially higher texture rate: 375.4 GTexel/s versus 236.2 GTexel/s for the RTX 4060, a 58.9% margin. The N1's 160 texture mapping units, compared to 96 for the RTX 4060, drive this result despite the lower clocks.

Pixel throughput favors the RTX 4060, which achieves 118.1 GPixel/s against the N1's 56.30 GPixel/s, roughly a 110% difference. The RTX 4060's 48 ROPs versus 24 ROPs on the N1 explains this. Memory bandwidth is nearly identical: 272.0 GB/s for the RTX 4060 and 273.2 GB/s for the N1, a negligible 0.4% spread. The RTX 4060 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, while the N1 uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus. The N1's much larger memory pool is paired with a slower effective memory clock of 8.5 Gbps versus 17 Gbps for the RTX 4060, resulting in comparable bandwidth figures.

Ray tracing hardware differs in count: the RTX 4060 has 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores, while the N1 has 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores. The RTX 4060 thus holds a 20% advantage in RT core count and a 20% advantage in tensor core count. Shading units also favor the RTX 4060: 3072 versus 2560 for the N1, a 20% margin. The N1's higher TMU count and larger die size (382 mm² versus 188 mm²) do not translate into compute or pixel advantages in the recorded specifications.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 delivers 15.11 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 25.8% higher than the NVIDIA N1 20SM's 12.01 TFLOPS.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: They are nearly identical. The RTX 4060 AD106 provides 272.0 GB/s, while the N1 20SM provides 273.2 GB/s, a difference of only 0.4% in favor of the N1.

Q: Which GPU has more texture mapping units and what is the resulting texture rate?

A: The N1 20SM has 160 TMUs, producing a texture rate of 375.4 GTexel/s. The RTX 4060 AD106 has 96 TMUs, producing 236.2 GTexel/s. The N1 leads by 58.9% in this metric.

Q: What is the difference in pixel fill rate?

A: The RTX 4060 AD106 achieves 118.1 GPixel/s, which is 110% higher than the N1 20SM's 56.30 GPixel/s, due to the RTX 4060's 48 ROPs versus 24 ROPs on the N1.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: The RTX 4060 AD106 has 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores. The N1 20SM has 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores. The RTX 4060 holds a 20% advantage in each category.

Q: What are the memory capacities and types for each GPU?

A: The RTX 4060 AD106 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. The N1 20SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4060 AD106 wins in scenarios that depend on raw compute throughput, pixel processing, and ray tracing capability. Its 15.11 TFLOPS FP32 output, 118.1 GPixel/s pixel rate, 24 RT cores, and 96 tensor cores position it as the stronger choice for workloads such as real-time graphics rendering, ray-traced effects, and AI inference that leverage tensor operations. The higher base and boost clocks (1830 MHz and 2460 MHz) further reinforce its advantage in latency-sensitive tasks where clock speed is the dominant factor. The 48 ROPs also make it better suited for high-resolution rasterization that stresses fill rate.

The N1 20SM wins in texture-heavy workloads and memory capacity. Its 375.4 GTexel/s texture rate, driven by 160 TMUs, is 58.9% ahead of the RTX 4060. This makes it preferable for tasks that repeatedly sample textures, such as certain compute shaders or image processing pipelines. The 128 GB LPDDR5X memory pool is 16 times larger than the RTX 4060's 8 GB, enabling the N1 to hold far larger datasets in local memory. Its 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, slightly above the RTX 4060's 272.0 GB/s, means memory-bound workloads see near-identical throughput, but the capacity difference is decisive for large-scale data residency. The N1's 256-bit bus also provides a wider path for memory transactions, even at the lower effective clock of 8.5 Gbps.

For mixed workloads, the choice depends on whether the bottleneck is texture fetch or compute. The RTX 4060's higher shading unit count (3072 versus 2560) and clock speeds give it the edge in general-purpose shader execution. The N1's higher TMU count and lower ROP count suggest a design optimized for streaming texture data rather than polygon fill. The N1's PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, versus the RTX 4060's PCIe 4.0 x8, provides higher host bandwidth for data transfers, which could benefit workloads that stream data from the CPU.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The RTX 4060 AD106 uses the AD106 chip, while the N1 20SM uses the GB20B chip. The RTX 4060 is part of the GeForce 40-series with Ada Lovelace architecture, whereas the N1 belongs to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation with Blackwell 2.0 architecture. Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the die sizes differ substantially: 188 mm² for the RTX 4060 versus 382 mm² for the N1. The RTX 4060's transistor count is listed as 22,900 million with a density of 121.8M per mm², while the N1's transistor count is unknown and density is not recorded.

Clock speeds differ: the RTX 4060 has a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 2460 MHz, versus 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost for the N1. Memory clocks are 2125 MHz (17 Gbps effective) for the RTX 4060 and 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) for the N1. Memory configuration varies: 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus for the RTX 4060, and 128 GB LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus for the N1. Bandwidth is similar (272.0 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s), but capacity and bus width differ by factors of 16 and 2, respectively.

Compute resources differ: 3072 shading units, 96 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 24 RT cores, and 96 tensor cores for the RTX 4060; 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 20 RT cores, and 80 tensor cores for the N1. The RTX 4060 produces a pixel rate of 118.1 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 236.2 GTexel/s. The N1 produces 56.30 GPixel/s and 375.4 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 15.11 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1) on the RTX 4060, and 12.01 TFLOPS for both on the N1.

Power and physical attributes differ: the RTX 4060 has a TDP of 115 W, a dual-slot form factor, one 12-pin power connector, and a suggested PSU of 300 W. The N1 has an unknown TDP, an IGP form factor, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. Bus interfaces differ: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RTX 4060 versus PCIe 5.0 x16 for the N1. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a for the RTX 4060, versus a single HDMI output for the N1. API support differs completely: the RTX 4060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the N1 lists N/A for all three APIs. Production status differs: the RTX 4060 is end-of-life, while the N1 is active. Release dates are 2024-03-31 for the RTX 4060 and 2026-05-31 for the N1.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 4060 AD106 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, while the N1 20SM uses Blackwell 2.0. This architectural split reflects different design goals: Ada Lovelace is a discrete GPU architecture tailored for gaming and graphics workloads, and Blackwell 2.0, as indicated by the "IGP" slot width, is an integrated graphics processor design for the N1x generation. The process node is identical at 5 nm from TSMC, but the die sizes diverge sharply: 188 mm² for the RTX 4060 versus 382 mm² for the N1. The N1's larger die, despite an unknown transistor count, suggests a more complex integrated design, likely including additional logic beyond the GPU cores.

The RTX 4060 integrates 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores, supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 has 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores but lists no API support in the database, indicating it may not expose a conventional graphics driver interface. The N1's architecture appears oriented toward data processing and memory capacity rather than traditional 3D rendering, given its 128 GB LPDDR5X memory and 256-bit bus. The RTX 4060's 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus is a conventional discrete GPU memory configuration.

Cache hierarchies are not recorded for either GPU, so comparisons must rely on core counts and memory subsystems. The N1's 160 TMUs versus 96 for the RTX 4060 indicates a higher ratio of texture units to shading units: 160/2560 (6.25%) for the N1 versus 96/3072 (3.13%) for the RTX 4060. This suggests the N1 dedicates proportionally more silicon to texture fetching. Conversely, the RTX 4060's 48 ROPs versus 24 ROPs gives it a higher ROP-to-shader ratio: 48/3072 (1.56%) versus 24/2560 (0.94%), favoring pixel output.

The RTX 4060 supports PCIe 4.0 x8, while the N1 supports PCIe 5.0 x16, providing the N1 with up to four times the host interface bandwidth. The N1's integrated nature, with no power connectors and an unknown TDP, contrasts with the RTX 4060's discrete 115 W TDP and 12-pin connector. The RTX 4060's predecessor is GeForce 30 and its successor is GeForce 50, placing it in a well-defined product lineage. The N1 has no recorded predecessor or successor, consistent with its status as a new integrated part. Both GPUs hold a 50th percentile ranking in the database's all-GPU distribution, and both have an average benchmark score of zero, meaning no performance data exists to validate architectural expectations.