OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

ASUS ProArt GeForce RTX 4060 review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£330VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):115 W

ASUS ProArt GeForce RTX 4060 Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 1 expert reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

ASUS ProArt GeForce RTX 4060
6.8/10

Overall score

Score
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 74% of models
Score components

40%

6.1

Technical score

25%

6.1

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

9.3

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 74% of graphics cards
7.4

Value for money

Value for money
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components

70%

6.8

Overall score

30%

8.8

Price

▼Worse than 54%
6.1

Technical score

Technical score
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 70% of models
Score components

44%

5.0

Performance

24%

4.0

Memory

12%

9.8

Power

11%

9.5

Features

5%

7.3

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

▼Worse than 70%
6.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 82% of models

6.1

Mark 7.4 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

8.0

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 review, with a printed score. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 82%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
  • asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
asus-proart-geforce-rtx-4060
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What owners say about the ASUS ProArt GeForce RTX 4060

Based on 197 owners sharing their experience in online comments

78%positive15%mixed7%negative

Owners praise its strong gaming performance and efficiency, while limited video memory and softer upscaling remain the main frustrations.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say 8GB of video memory forces them to lower texture settings in some demanding games, and they expect it to limit performance in future titles.7
  • Owners say DLSS at 1080p looks softer and blurrier than native resolution, and frame generation can cause shimmering or flickering textures.3
  • Owners report stutter and frame drops below 60 fps in some demanding games, and some laptop versions dip further under load.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card ASUS ProArt GeForce RTX 4060

Technical score
Technical score
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 70% of models
Score components:

44%

5.0

Performance

24%

4.0

Memory

12%

9.8

Power

11%

9.5

Features

5%

7.3

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

6.1
Reviews score
6.1
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components:

70%

6.8

Overall score

30%

8.8

Price

7.4
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
10,660 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 10,660 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 67.5% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
6,000 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 6,000 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 67.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.4% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
19,587 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 19,587 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 61.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
9,177 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 9,177 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 64.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
15.11 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 15.11 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 63.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 56.8% of graphics cards and equal to 25.7% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
272 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 272 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 76.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.2% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
17,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 17,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 61% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.3% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.5% of graphics cards and equal to 50.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x8
This graphics card uses x8 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 75.9% of graphics cards and equal to 22.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.8% of graphics cards and equal to 77.2% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.3% of graphics cards and equal to 46.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
18 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 18 Gbps, which is slower than on 57.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
115 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 115 W, which is lower than that of 85.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.7% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
115 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 115 W under peak load, which is lower than 87.4% of graphics cards and equal to 2% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
550 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 550 W PSU, which is lower than that of 61.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 13.3% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
115 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 115 W, which is lower than that of 87.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.2% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
115 W
Show more
Size
300x 120x 50 mm
Length
300 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 300 mm long, which is longer than 57.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 2.9% of graphics cards.
Height
120 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 120 mm tall, which is shorter than 59.3% of graphics cards and equal in height to 5.3% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2.5 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s, which is slimmer than 35.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 14.7% of graphics cards.
Weight
924 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 924 g, which is lighter than 61% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of Graphics cards.
Show more

ASUS ProArt GeForce RTX 4060 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 46.5% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (115 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    115 W vs 215 W
  • 21.4% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,125 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,125 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 1.8% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,550 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,550 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 47.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (115 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    115 W vs 220 W
  • 15.4% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (550 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    550 W vs 650 W
  • 19.2% higher sentiment score
    9.3 vs 7.8
  • 6.82x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (242 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS.
    242 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS
  • 11.4 dB quieter under load
    This graphics card has a lower load noise level than the average graphics card (24 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    24 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 19.2% higher sentiment score
    9.3 vs 7.8
  • 1.8% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,550 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,550 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 6.82x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (242 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS.
    242 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS
  • 21.4% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,125 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,125 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 46.5% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (115 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    115 W vs 215 W
  • 47.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (115 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    115 W vs 220 W
  • 15.4% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (550 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    550 W vs 650 W
  • 11.4 dB quieter under load
    This graphics card has a lower load noise level than the average graphics card (24 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    24 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 47.7% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (115 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    115 W vs 220 W
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 16 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    24 vs 40
  • 88 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (96 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    96 vs 184
  • 16 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    24 vs 40
  • 32 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    32 vs 64
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • 15.3% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 82% of models

    6.1

    Mark 7.4 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    8.0

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 review, with a printed score. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    6.1 vs 7.2
  • 16 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    24 vs 40
  • 88 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (96 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    96 vs 184
  • 16 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    24 vs 40
  • 32 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    32 vs 64
  • 37.5% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (236.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    236.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 26.8% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (118.1 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    118.1 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 48 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (96 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    96 vs 144
  • 33.1% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (15.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    15.11 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 27.9% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (10,660 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    10,660 points vs 14,779 points
  • 34.4% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (6,000 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    6,000 points vs 9,148 points
  • 4.7% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,830 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,830 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 13.5% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (19,587 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    19,587 points vs 22,638 points
  • 50% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.2 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.24 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 39.3% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (272 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    272 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 10.5% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (17,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    17,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (3 vs 3.1).
    3 vs 3.1
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (5 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    5 vs 6
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.
  • 17.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (300 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    300 mm vs 282.2 mm

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Overview video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.5
creativebloq.com
✓ explicit
26/05/2024
Hands-on review · Creative work
Verdict
The ASUS ProArt GeForce RTX 4060 suits designers doing everyday illustration and Photoshop work, but heavy 3D, video and AAA games need a stronger card.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about ASUS ProArt GeForce RTX 4060

  • Premium, sleek minimalist design without excessive RGB lighting
  • Highly power-efficient (115W draw) requiring only a 550W PSU
  • Excellent thermal management, maintaining temperatures under 65°C even under load
  • Quiet operation thanks to triple Axial-tech fans and 0dB silent mode
  • Strong software ecosystem including DLSS 3 Frame Generation and AV1 encoding
  • Ideal for compact builds or workstations needing a triple-fan cooling solution in a slim form factor
  • Solid performance for 1080p gaming and professional creative tasks like Blender or video editing

What customers don't like about ASUS ProArt GeForce RTX 4060

  • Price premium compared to other RTX 4060 models and competitors like the RX 7600
  • 8GB VRAM is considered limiting for high-resolution (1440p+) or future-proofing
  • Narrow 128-bit memory bus can lead to bottlenecks in bandwidth-heavy workloads
  • Underwhelming generational performance uplift over the previous RTX 3060 Ti
  • Triple-fan design (300mm length) may not fit in extremely small ITX cases despite being an entry-level GPU

Verdict

The ASUS ProArt GeForce RTX 4060 is a compact, workstation-oriented GPU featuring 8GB of GDDR6 memory, 3072 CUDA cores, and a 128-bit memory interface built on the efficient Ada Lovelace architecture. Its main characteristics include a sleek, minimalist 2.5-slot design and a triple-fan cooling system that remains remarkably quiet under load. Key pros are its low power consumption, support for DLSS 3 frame generation, and its 'creator-first' aesthetic that fits easily into smaller professional builds. However, its main cons are the limited 8GB VRAM capacity, which may struggle with heavy 4K video rendering or high-resolution textures, and a premium price tag compared to other RTX 4060 models.

Compare ASUS ProArt GeForce RTX 4060 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of ASUS ProArt GeForce RTX 4060 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found