NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a complete asymmetry in benchmark coverage between these two NVIDIA parts. The GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile has nine recorded benchmark scores across Geekbench and Passmark suites, while the Rubin GPU has no benchmark entries in the database. This makes a direct head-to-head comparison of measured performance impossible; the only quantitative comparison available is through architectural specifications and the RTX 4060 Mobile’s standing against its nearest rivals.

The RTX 4060 Mobile delivers an average benchmark score of 22,729 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 67th percentile of all GPUs tracked. Its strongest result is in Geekbench Vulkan at 89,569, marginally ahead of its Geekbench OpenCL score of 89,420. Passmark results vary widely: DirectX 9 scores 216, DirectX 11 scores 157, DirectX 10 scores 107, and DirectX 12 scores 73. The Passmark G3D score of 17,469 and GPU Compute score of 6,816 round out the suite, while the 2D graphics test returns 730.

Against its nearest rivals, the RTX 4060 Mobile sits in a tightly clustered group. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 averages 22,895, which is 0.7% higher than the 4060 Mobile. The Intel Arc B580 averages 23,021, 1.3% higher. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT averages 22,549, 0.8% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile averages 22,435, 1.3% lower. These deltas indicate that the 4060 Mobile performs within roughly one to two percent of each rival, a statistically narrow margin that suggests near-parity in aggregate compute performance.

The Rubin GPU’s average benchmark score is recorded as zero, with no rival list and a 50th percentile standing that reflects its lack of test data rather than any measured performance. The database therefore contains no head-to-head benchmark wins for either product; the wins counters for both items are zero. Any performance assessment of the Rubin GPU must rely entirely on its specification sheet.

FAQ

Q: Does the Rubin GPU have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The Rubin GPU has an empty benchmarks array, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals listed. The RTX 4060 Mobile has nine recorded benchmark scores.

Q: How does the RTX 4060 Mobile compare to its closest rival, the RTX 2080?

A: The RTX 2080 averages 22,895, which is 0.7% higher than the RTX 4060 Mobile’s 22,729 average. This places the two within a fraction of a percent of each other.

Q: What is the RTX 4060 Mobile’s strongest benchmark result?

A: Its highest recorded score is 89,569 in Geekbench Vulkan, marginally above its Geekbench OpenCL score of 89,420.

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: The RTX 4060 Mobile uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Rubin GPU uses 288 GB of HBM4 on a 16,384-bit bus with 22.1 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 compute throughput?

A: The RTX 4060 Mobile delivers 11.61 TFLOPS FP32, while the Rubin GPU delivers 130.0 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: What process nodes are used by each chip?

A: The RTX 4060 Mobile uses a 5 nm TSMC process, while the Rubin GPU uses a 3 nm TSMC process.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies and market segments. The RTX 4060 Mobile uses the AD107 chip, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm TSMC process. It contains 18,900 million transistors on a die size of 159 mm², yielding a transistor density of 118.9 million per mm². The Rubin GPU uses the GR100 chip, built on the Rubin architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm TSMC process. It contains 336,000 million transistors on a die size of 1,456 mm², yielding a transistor density of 230.8 million per mm².

The compute resources differ dramatically. The RTX 4060 Mobile has 3,072 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, 48 ROPs, 24 RT cores, and 96 tensor cores. The Rubin GPU has 28,672 shading units, 896 texture mapping units, 24 ROPs, and 896 tensor cores. The RTX 4060 Mobile’s RT core count is listed, while the Rubin GPU’s RT core count is recorded as null, indicating either an absence of dedicated RT hardware or missing data. The Rubin GPU’s FP16 throughput is 260.0 TFLOPS, which is double its FP32 rate of 130.0 TFLOPS, indicating a 2:1 ratio. The RTX 4060 Mobile’s FP16 and FP32 rates are identical at 11.61 TFLOPS each, indicating a 1:1 ratio.

Clock speeds also diverge substantially. The RTX 4060 Mobile runs at a base clock of 1,545 MHz and a boost clock of 1,890 MHz, with memory at 2,000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The Rubin GPU runs at a much lower base clock of 700 MHz but a higher boost clock of 2,267 MHz, with memory at 2,695 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective). Despite the lower base clock, the Rubin GPU’s massive shading unit count gives it far higher aggregate throughput.

The memory subsystems are in different leagues. The RTX 4060 Mobile uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Rubin GPU uses 288 GB of HBM4 on a 16,384-bit bus, achieving 22.1 TB/s bandwidth. The Rubin GPU’s bandwidth is more than 86 times that of the mobile part, reflecting its server-oriented design.

Power and form factor differences are equally stark. The RTX 4060 Mobile has a TDP of 115 W, uses an IGP slot width, and has no power connectors, consistent with a laptop component. The Rubin GPU has a TDP of 2,300 W, uses an SXM Module slot width, and lists a suggested PSU of 2,700 W. The Rubin GPU also has no display outputs, while the RTX 4060 Mobile’s outputs are described as portable device dependent.

API support diverges completely. The RTX 4060 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Rubin GPU lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating it is not designed for consumer graphics APIs. The bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the mobile part versus PCIe 6.0 x16 for the Rubin GPU.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these are not competing products in any meaningful sense. The RTX 4060 Mobile is an active, shipping mobile GPU with measured performance data, a 67th percentile standing among all GPUs, and a clear position in the GeForce 40 Mobile generation. The Rubin GPU is an active server product with no benchmark scores, no rivals, and a 50th percentile that reflects missing data rather than measured capability.

For laptop gaming and portable compute workloads, the RTX 4060 Mobile is the only one of the two with any recorded performance evidence. Its nine benchmark scores, ranging from 73 in Passmark DirectX 12 to 89,569 in Geekbench Vulkan, provide a comprehensive picture of its capabilities. The nearest rivals, particularly the RTX 2080 at 0.7% higher and the RX 7700 XT at 0.8% lower, show that the 4060 Mobile sits in a competitive mid-range band.

For server-side AI and high-throughput compute, the Rubin GPU’s specifications point to an entirely different performance class, but the database contains no measured results to confirm this. Its 130.0 TFLOPS FP32, 260.0 TFLOPS FP16, and 22.1 TB/s bandwidth are orders of magnitude beyond the mobile part, but without benchmark data, those numbers remain theoretical.

The choice between these two depends entirely on the use case and available data. The RTX 4060 Mobile is the only option with verified benchmark performance and consumer API support. The Rubin GPU is the only option with server-scale memory and compute resources, but it lacks both display outputs and consumer graphics API support. No measured performance data exists for the Rubin GPU, so any selection based on that part relies purely on its specification sheet.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every recorded specification field. The RTX 4060 Mobile uses the AD107 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, while the Rubin GPU uses the GR100 chip with Rubin architecture. Process nodes are 5 nm versus 3 nm, both from TSMC. Transistor counts are 18,900 million versus 336,000 million, and die sizes are 159 mm² versus 1,456 mm², giving transistor densities of 118.9M per mm² versus 230.8M per mm².

Clock specifications list the RTX 4060 Mobile at 1,545 MHz base and 1,890 MHz boost, with memory at 2,000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The Rubin GPU lists 700 MHz base and 2,267 MHz boost, with memory at 2,695 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective). Memory capacity is 8 GB GDDR6 versus 288 GB HBM4, with bus widths of 128 bits versus 16,384 bits and bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s versus 22.1 TB/s.

Compute unit counts show 3,072 shading units versus 28,672, 96 TMUs versus 896, and 48 ROPs versus 24. RT cores number 24 for the mobile part and null for the Rubin GPU. Tensor cores number 96 versus 896. Pixel rates are 90.72 GPixel/s versus 54.41 GPixel/s, while texture rates are 181.4 GTexel/s versus 2,031.2 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 11.61 TFLOPS versus 130.0 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 11.61 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 260.0 TFLOPS (2:1).

Power and form factors list TDPs of 115 W versus 2,300 W, slot widths of IGP versus SXM Module, and power connectors of None versus null. The suggested PSU for the Rubin GPU is 2,700 W. Bus interfaces are PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 6.0 x16. Display outputs are portable device dependent versus no outputs. API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 for the mobile part, versus N/A for all three on the Rubin GPU.

Release dates differ by nearly three years: the RTX 4060 Mobile launched on 2023-01-02, while the Rubin GPU is dated 2025-12-31. The predecessor and successor fields also differ: the mobile part follows GeForce 30 Mobile and leads to GeForce 50 Mobile, while the Rubin GPU follows Server Blackwell and has no listed successor.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4060 Mobile wins in every category where measured data exists. Its benchmark scores, while clustered closely with rivals, are recorded and verifiable. It supports consumer graphics APIs including DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it suitable for gaming and general-purpose graphics workloads. Its 115 W TDP and IGP form factor fit portable devices, and its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is standard for mobile platforms. The pixel rate of 90.72 GPixel/s is higher than the Rubin GPU’s 54.41 GPixel/s, which suggests the mobile part may have an advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios despite its far smaller compute footprint.

The Rubin GPU wins on raw specification counts. Its FP32 throughput of 130.0 TFLOPS is roughly 11 times that of the RTX 4060 Mobile. Its FP16 throughput of 260.0 TFLOPS is roughly 22 times higher. Memory bandwidth of 22.1 TB/s is more than 86 times greater. The 288 GB HBM4 capacity dwarfs the 8 GB GDDR6 allocation. The 896 tensor cores versus 96, and 28,672 shading units versus 3,072, point to a design optimized for massive parallel workloads. The 3 nm process node and 230.8M per mm² transistor density represent a denser, more advanced fabrication.

For gaming on laptops, the RTX 4060 Mobile is the only viable choice, given its consumer API support, display outputs, and measured performance data. For server-side compute, AI training, or data center workloads, the Rubin GPU’s specifications indicate far greater capacity, but the absence of benchmark data means its real-world performance cannot be confirmed from the database. The RTX 4060 Mobile’s nearest rival scores show it performs within 1.3% of the RTX 5060 Mobile, 0.8% of the RX 7700 XT, 0.7% of the RTX 2080, and 1.3% of the Arc B580. These tight deltas indicate the mobile part is a competitive mid-range option, while the Rubin GPU has no comparable data points to assess its standing.