NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

The Verdict

The database comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile and the NVIDIA N1 16SM reveals two fundamentally different products with almost no overlap in purpose. The RTX 4060 Mobile is a discrete-class mobile GPU built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, while the N1 16SM is a Blackwell 2.0-based integrated graphics processor (IGP) designed for a different workload profile.

Benchmark data shows the RTX 4060 Mobile produces an average benchmark score of 22,729 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 67th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 at 22,895 average score (0.7% faster), the Intel Arc B580 at 23,021 (1.3% faster), the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT at 22,549 (0.8% slower), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile at 22,435 (1.3% slower). The N1 16SM has no recorded benchmark scores, no average score, and no nearest rivals in the database, making direct performance comparison impossible from recorded data.

The verdict is straightforward: the RTX 4060 Mobile is for users who need a proven, actively benchmarked mobile GPU with established performance metrics. The N1 16SM is a newer, larger-die IGP with substantial memory capacity and a much higher boost clock, but its performance remains unquantified in the database. The RTX 4060 Mobile delivers 11.61 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS. The N1 16SM offers 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory versus 8 GB of GDDR6, which indicates a fundamentally different memory strategy.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The RTX 4060 Mobile delivers 11.61 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is higher than the N1 16SM's 9.609 TFLOPS. The difference is approximately 20.9% in favor of the RTX 4060 Mobile.

Q: How does the memory configuration differ between the two?

A: The RTX 4060 Mobile uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth and 2000 MHz memory clock (16 Gbps effective). The N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth and 1067 MHz memory clock (8.5 Gbps effective).

Q: What are the architecture differences?

A: The RTX 4060 Mobile uses the AD107 chip built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with TSMC's 5 nm process. The N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip built on Blackwell 2.0, also on TSMC's 5 nm process. The RTX 4060 Mobile has 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, while the N1 16SM has an unknown transistor count on a 382 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RTX 4060 Mobile has 3,072 shading units, compared to 2,048 shading units on the N1 16SM. The RTX 4060 Mobile also has 96 TMUs and 48 ROPs, while the N1 16SM has 128 TMUs and 24 ROPs.

Q: What is the pixel and texture throughput comparison?

A: The RTX 4060 Mobile achieves 90.72 GPixel/s pixel rate and 181.4 GTexel/s texture rate. The N1 16SM achieves 56.30 GPixel/s pixel rate and 300.3 GTexel/s texture rate. The N1 16SM has substantially higher texture throughput despite lower pixel throughput.

Q: What are the release dates and production status?

A: The RTX 4060 Mobile was released on 2023-01-02 and has an Active production status. The N1 16SM has a release date of 2026-05-31 and is also marked as Active in production. The RTX 4060 Mobile's predecessor is the GeForce 30 Mobile series and its successor is the GeForce 50 Mobile.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two NVIDIA parts is substantial. The RTX 4060 Mobile uses the AD107 chip based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The chip integrates 18,900 million transistors into a 159 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 118.9M per mm². The N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip based on Blackwell 2.0, also fabricated by TSMC on 5 nm, but the die is significantly larger at 382 mm². The transistor count for the GB20B is listed as unknown in the database, and no transistor density figure is recorded.

The RTX 4060 Mobile belongs to the GeForce 40 Mobile generation and the GeForce 40-series family. The N1 16SM belongs to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation with no series designation. The N1 16SM has no predecessor or successor listed in the database, whereas the RTX 4060 Mobile has the GeForce 30 Mobile as predecessor and GeForce 50 Mobile as successor.

Compute resources differ markedly. The RTX 4060 Mobile fields 3,072 shading units, 96 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 24 RT cores, and 96 tensor cores. The N1 16SM fields 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 16 RT cores, and 64 tensor cores. The shading unit count favors the RTX 4060 Mobile by a margin of 50%, while the N1 16SM has 33.3% more TMUs. Both GPUs support FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning each delivers the same FP16 and FP32 throughput.

API support also separates the two. The RTX 4060 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 16SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan in the database, suggesting its driver stack or API compatibility profile differs fundamentally from the discrete mobile GPU.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds diverge sharply between the two. The RTX 4060 Mobile has a base clock of 1545 MHz and a boost clock of 1890 MHz. The N1 16SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The N1 16SM's boost clock is 24.1% higher than the RTX 4060 Mobile's boost clock, but its base clock is 52.0% lower.

Memory specifications are the most dramatic difference. The RTX 4060 Mobile uses 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus, 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, and a 2000 MHz memory clock (16 Gbps effective). The N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus, 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, and a 1067 MHz memory clock (8.5 Gbps effective). The N1 16SM provides 16 times the memory capacity and 6.7% more bandwidth, despite a lower memory clock.

The bus interface differs: the RTX 4060 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the N1 16SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The N1 16SM has a single HDMI display output, while the RTX 4060 Mobile's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent. Both are IGP slot width and have no power connectors listed. The RTX 4060 Mobile has a TDP of 115 W, while the N1 16SM's TDP is unknown.

The RTX 4060 Mobile's pixel rate is 90.72 GPixel/s, higher than the N1 16SM's 56.30 GPixel/s by 61.1%. Texture rate tells the opposite story: the N1 16SM achieves 300.3 GTexel/s versus the RTX 4060 Mobile's 181.4 GTexel/s, a 65.5% advantage for the N1 16SM.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries between the RTX 4060 Mobile and the N1 16SM. The wins count for each product is zero. The N1 16SM has no benchmark scores recorded at all, which means no direct comparisons can be drawn from measured results.

The RTX 4060 Mobile's recorded benchmark suite provides context for its positioning. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 89,420, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 89,569. PassMark results include DirectX 10 at 107, DirectX 11 at 157, DirectX 12 at 73, DirectX 9 at 216, G2D at 730, G3D at 17,469, and GPU compute at 6,816. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 22,729, placing it in the 67th percentile of all GPUs tracked in the database.

The nearest rival comparisons for the RTX 4060 Mobile show a tightly clustered competitive field. The Intel Arc B580 leads at 23,021 average score, which is 1.3% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 sits at 22,895, 0.7% higher. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT comes in at 22,549, 0.8% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile rounds out the group at 22,435, 1.3% lower. These delta percentages indicate the RTX 4060 Mobile sits within a narrow performance band, with all four rivals within roughly 1.3% of its average score.

For the N1 16SM, the database records a 50th percentile placement among all GPUs, but with zero average benchmark score and no rival entries, this percentile appears to be a placeholder rather than a measured result. The absence of benchmark data means the N1 16SM's actual performance cannot be validated against the RTX 4060 Mobile or any other GPU in the database. The N1 16SM's specifications suggest a design focused on memory capacity and texture throughput, but the recorded data does not substantiate any performance claims.