NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural differences between the RTX 4060 AD106 and the RTX 4000 Ada Generation?

A: The RTX 4060 uses the AD106 chip with 22,900 million transistors on a 188 mm² die, while the RTX 4000 Ada uses the AD104 chip with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. Both are built on TSMC's 5 nm process with identical transistor density of 121.8M per mm².

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The RTX 4060 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 272.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4000 Ada has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 360.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4000's memory clock runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 2125 MHz (17 Gbps effective) for the RTX 4060.

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking for each card?

A: The RTX 4060 sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The RTX 4000 Ada ranks at the 95th percentile, placing it well above the majority of recorded graphics cards.

Q: Which card has higher compute throughput?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada delivers 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 (1:1), while the RTX 4060 provides 15.11 TFLOPS in both precision formats. The RTX 4000 also has double the shading units (6144 vs 3072), TMUs (192 vs 96), RT cores (48 vs 24), and tensor cores (192 vs 96).

Q: What are the physical and power differences?

A: The RTX 4060 is a dual-slot card with a 115 W TDP and a 1x 12-pin power connector. The RTX 4000 Ada is a single-slot card with a 130 W TDP and a 1x 16-pin connector. Both recommend a 300 W power supply.

Q: What display outputs does each card offer?

A: The RTX 4060 includes 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The RTX 4000 Ada provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a with no HDMI output.

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the Ada Lovelace architecture and TSMC 5 nm process, but they diverge significantly in chip design and resource allocation. The RTX 4060 AD106 is a smaller die at 188 mm² with 22,900 million transistors, while the RTX 4000 Ada's AD104 is substantially larger at 294 mm² with 35,800 million transistors. The transistor density is identical at 121.8M per mm², indicating the same manufacturing node and similar design rules.

The RTX 4000 Ada doubles the execution resources across the board: 6144 shading units versus 3072, 192 TMUs versus 96, and 64 ROPs versus 48. RT core count doubles from 24 to 48, and tensor cores double from 96 to 192. This translates directly to higher fill rates: the RTX 4000 achieves 139.2 GPixel/s pixel rate and 417.6 GTexel/s texture rate, compared to 118.1 GPixel/s and 236.2 GTexel/s for the RTX 4060.

Clock speeds favor the smaller card. The RTX 4060 runs a 1830 MHz base and 2460 MHz boost, while the RTX 4000 operates at 1500 MHz base and 2175 MHz boost. Despite lower clocks, the RTX 4000's resource advantage produces 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 versus 15.11 TFLOPS for the RTX 4060. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RTX 4000 uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the RTX 4060 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The RTX 4000 is 245 mm long and 112 mm tall, single-slot, whereas the RTX 4060 is dual-slot with no listed dimensions.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two benchmark results for the RTX 4000 Ada: 146,593 in Geekbench OpenCL and 123,842 in Geekbench Vulkan. The RTX 4060 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so direct numerical comparison relies on the RTX 4000's absolute performance and its standing against other professional GPUs.

The RTX 4000's average benchmark score is 135,218, placing it at the 95th percentile. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA A10M, scores 135,230, a delta of 0%. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 scores 135,396, which is 0.1% lower. The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo scores 135,774 (0.4% lower), and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 scores 136,472 (0.9% lower). These figures show the RTX 4000 essentially matches the A10M, trails the W6800 by a negligible margin, and sits slightly behind the W6800X Duo and PRO V620.

In the absence of RTX 4060 benchmarks, the architectural data provides the only basis for comparison. The RTX 4000's FP32 throughput is 77% higher (26.73 TFLOPS versus 15.11 TFLOPS), and its memory bandwidth is 32% higher (360.0 GB/s versus 272.0 GB/s). The RTX 4000 also doubles RT and tensor core counts, which directly impacts ray tracing and AI workload performance. The RTX 4060's higher boost clock (2460 MHz versus 2175 MHz) partially compensates, but the resource gap remains decisive.

The RTX 4000's 20 GB memory capacity is 2.5 times the RTX 4060's 8 GB, and its 160-bit bus width exceeds the 128-bit bus of the RTX 4060. These differences show in memory-intensive tasks: the RTX 4000 can hold larger datasets and models in VRAM, while the RTX 4060 will spill to system memory sooner.

Specification Differences

| Specification | RTX 4060 AD106 | RTX 4000 Ada |

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

| Chip | AD106 | AD104 |

| Transistors | 22,900 million | 35,800 million |

| Die size | 188 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Base clock | 1830 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2460 MHz | 2175 MHz |

| Memory size | 8 GB | 20 GB |

| Memory bus | 128 bit | 160 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 272.0 GB/s | 360.0 GB/s |

| Memory clock | 2125 MHz (17 Gbps) | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps) |

| Shading units | 3072 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 96 | 192 |

| ROPs | 48 | 64 |

| RT cores | 24 | 48 |

| Tensor cores | 96 | 192 |

| Pixel rate | 118.1 GPixel/s | 139.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 236.2 GTexel/s | 417.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 15.11 TFLOPS | 26.73 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 15.11 TFLOPS | 26.73 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 115 W | 130 W |

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

| Power connector | 1x 12-pin | 1x 16-pin |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DP 1.4a | 4x DP 1.4a |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 245 mm x 112 mm |

| Production status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release date | 2024-03-31 | 2023-08-08 |

| Percentile vs all GPUs | 50 | 95 |

Both cards share the same 5 nm TSMC process, transistor density, memory type (GDDR6), TDP recommendation (300 W PSU), and API support. They also both use Ada Lovelace architecture and belong to the GeForce 40-series family. The RTX 4060 is listed as end-of-life with a GeForce 30 predecessor and GeForce 50 successor, while the RTX 4000 is active with a Workstation Ampere predecessor and Blackwell PRO W successor.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4000 Ada wins in every compute-heavy metric recorded. Its 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 output is nearly double the RTX 4060's 15.11 TFLOPS, making it the clear choice for raw compute tasks such as rendering, simulation, and scientific calculations. The doubled RT core count (48 versus 24) and tensor core count (192 versus 96) give it a substantial edge in ray-traced workloads and AI inference respectively. The 20 GB memory capacity and 360.0 GB/s bandwidth allow it to handle larger datasets, higher-resolution textures, and complex models that would exceed the RTX 4060's 8 GB allocation. Its 95th percentile ranking confirms strong standing against all GPUs in the database.

The RTX 4060 wins on efficiency and physical footprint in some respects. Its 115 W TDP is 15 W lower than the RTX 4000's 130 W, and its higher boost clock (2460 MHz versus 2175 MHz) indicates faster per-core execution when resources are underutilized. The dual-slot design may fit in more standard desktop cases, while the RTX 4000's single-slot form factor suits dense workstation builds. The RTX 4060 also includes an HDMI 2.1 output, which the RTX 4000 lacks. However, the RTX 4060's 50th percentile ranking shows it sits at the median of all GPUs, while the RTX 4000 stands near the top.

For gaming and consumer workloads, the RTX 4060's higher clocks and lower power draw may provide adequate performance in titles that do not stress memory capacity. For professional workloads, the RTX 4000's resource advantage, larger memory pool, and higher bandwidth make it dominant. The RTX 4000's PCIe 4.0 x16 interface also provides twice the bus bandwidth of the RTX 4060's x8 connection, reducing transfer bottlenecks in data-heavy applications.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two cards by intended use case. The RTX 4000 Ada Generation is the superior performer in every recorded benchmark and architectural metric. Its 95th percentile ranking, 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 20 GB VRAM, and 360.0 GB/s bandwidth position it as a professional workstation part. The nearest rival data shows it trading blows with the NVIDIA A10M and AMD Radeon PRO W6800 series, all within 0.9% of each other. This places the RTX 4000 in a competitive professional segment where small percentage differences in average scores separate top-tier cards.

The RTX 4060 AD106, with its 50th percentile ranking and no recorded benchmark scores, appears as a consumer-oriented part. Its 8 GB memory, 128-bit bus, and 272.0 GB/s bandwidth suit mainstream gaming at moderate resolutions and settings. The higher boost clock of 2460 MHz suggests strong per-core performance, but the halved resource counts (3072 shading units, 24 RT cores, 96 tensor cores) limit its ceiling in demanding workloads.

The production status reinforces this split: the RTX 4060 is end-of-life, replaced by the GeForce 50 series, while the RTX 4000 remains active with a Blackwell PRO W successor planned. The RTX 4000's single-slot design, 130 W TDP, and four DisplayPort outputs target professional environments requiring compact, multi-display setups. The RTX 4060's dual-slot design and HDMI output cater to consumer systems. Users with compute-heavy, memory-intensive, or AI-focused workloads should select the RTX 4000 Ada. Users prioritizing lower power draw and consumer connectivity should consider the RTX 4060, but the recorded data shows it operates in a substantially lower performance tier.