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 TUF GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£390VRAM:12 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):170 W

ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 2 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming
6.7/10

Overall score

Score
6.7/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
Score components

40%

6.0

Technical score

25%

6.0

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

9.4

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 77% of graphics cards
7.2

Value for money

Value for money
7.2/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
Score components

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

8.5

Price

â–¼Worse than 68%
6.0

Technical score

Technical score
6.0/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 73% of models
Score components

44%

4.2

Performance

24%

5.5

Memory

12%

9.2

Power

11%

9.2

Features

5%

6.4

Design

4%

9.2

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 73%
6.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
6.0/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models

6.0

Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.7

Average grade

20%

6.5

Popularity

Grades by review (2)
2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 83%
?

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-tuf-geforce-rtx-3060-gaming
asus-tuf-geforce-rtx-3060-gaming
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.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming

Technical score
Technical score
6.0/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 73% of models
Score components:

44%

4.2

Performance

24%

5.5

Memory

12%

9.2

Power

11%

9.2

Features

5%

6.4

Design

4%

9.2

Connectivity

6.0
Reviews score
6.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.2/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
Score components:

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

8.5

Price

7.2
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
8,625 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 8,625 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 76.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
5,038 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 5,038 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 72.5% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
17,064 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 17,064 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 68.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
8,438 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 8,438 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 68.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.4% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
12.74 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 12.74 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 69.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.7% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
12 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 12 GB of VRAM, which is more than 46% of graphics cards and equal to 16% 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
192 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 192 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 31.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 18.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
360 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 360 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 61.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
15,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 15,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 67.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.5% 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
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% 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
8.1 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 8.1 Gbps, which is slower than on 65.3% of graphics cards and equal to 22.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
170 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 170 W, which is lower than that of 63.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.9% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
170 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 170 W under peak load, which is lower than 66.6% of graphics cards and equal to 1.7% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
650 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 650 W PSU, which is lower than that of 39.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 13.9% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
210 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 210 W, which is lower than that of 54.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
170 W
Show more
Size
30.1x 14.3x 5.4 mm
Length
301 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 301 mm long, which is longer than 60.5% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Height
143 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 143 mm tall, which is taller than 88.1% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2.7 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2.7 slot/s, which is wider than 65.9% of graphics cards and equal in width to 2.2% of graphics cards.
Weight
996 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 996 g, which is lighter than 55% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of Graphics cards.
Show more

ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 20.9% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (170 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    170 W vs 215 W
  • 20.5% higher sentiment score
    9.4 vs 7.8
  • 7.1% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,875 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,875 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • Supports LHR limiting
    This graphics card supports an LHR limiter, while the average graphics card does not. 7.5% of Graphics cards support one.
  • 10 °C lower load temperature
    This graphics card has a lower load temperature than the average graphics card (57 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    57 °C vs 67 °C
  • 3.59x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (127.3 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS.
    127.3 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS
  • More NVENC sessions
    This graphics card has more concurrent NVENC sessions than the average graphics card (12 vs 8). The average graphics card has 8 concurrent NVENC sessions.
    12 vs 8
  • 20.5% higher sentiment score
    9.4 vs 7.8
  • 3.59x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (127.3 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS.
    127.3 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS
  • 7.1% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,875 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,875 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • Supports LHR limiting
    This graphics card supports an LHR limiter, while the average graphics card does not. 7.5% of Graphics cards support one.
  • More NVENC sessions
    This graphics card has more concurrent NVENC sessions than the average graphics card (12 vs 8). The average graphics card has 8 concurrent NVENC sessions.
    12 vs 8
  • 20.9% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (170 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    170 W vs 215 W
  • 10 °C lower load temperature
    This graphics card has a lower load temperature than the average graphics card (57 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    57 °C vs 67 °C
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 26.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,852 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,852 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 31.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,320 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,320 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 12 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (28 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    28 vs 40
  • 72 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (112 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    112 vs 184
  • 60% larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (8 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    8 nm vs 5 nm
  • 47.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (199 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    199 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 12 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (28 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    28 vs 40
  • 16.7% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.0/ 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
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 83% of models

    6.0

    Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.7

    Average grade

    20%

    6.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    6.0 vs 7.2
  • 2.6% worse value for money
    ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming has worse value for money than the average graphics card (7.22 vs 7.4).
    7.22 vs 7.41
  • 26.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,852 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,852 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 31.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,320 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,320 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 12 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (28 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    28 vs 40
  • 72 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (112 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    112 vs 184
  • 47.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (199 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    199 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 12 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (28 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    28 vs 40
  • 44.9% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (88.9 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    88.9 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 16 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (48 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    48 vs 64
  • 43.6% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (12.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    12.74 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 32 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (112 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    112 vs 144
  • 41.6% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (8,625 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    8,625 points vs 14,779 points
  • 2 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2021 vs 2023).
    February 2021
    2021 vs 2023
  • 24.6% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (17,064 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    17,064 points vs 22,638 points
  • 44.9% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (5,038 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    5,038 points vs 9,148 points
  • 56.8% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (12.7 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    12.74 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 58.3% 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.
    0.2 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 21.1% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (15,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    15,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 87.5% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (3 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    3 MB vs 24 MB
  • 19.6% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (360 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    360 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 60% larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (8 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    8 nm vs 5 nm
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (1 vs 3.1).
    1 vs 3.1
  • 47.6% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (12,000 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    12,000 million vs 22,900 million
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 2.1a).
    2.1 vs 2.1a
  • 62.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 18 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (143 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    143 mm vs 125 mm
  • 18.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (301 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    301 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 0.2 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (2.7 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2.7 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s

Video reviews

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

4.0
Honest Straightforward Reviews
≈ estimated
09/04/2021
Full review · benchmarks and price-per-frame analysis
Verdict
ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming is not worth its current price, so it is a poor buy right now.
9.0
GigaGeek
≈ estimated
07/06/2021
Unboxing and first look · features and cooling overview
Verdict
ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming is a good card with strong cooling, though somewhat pricey, and a solid pick for builds with a Ryzen 5600X or 5800X.
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming

  • Exceptional cooling performance that keeps temperatures low even under heavy gaming loads
  • Extremely quiet operation, with fans that often remain idle during low-intensity tasks
  • High-quality, robust build with a protective metal backplate and stainless steel I/O bracket
  • Generous 12GB of VRAM provides good future-proofing and handles creative work like 3D modeling
  • Dual BIOS switch allows users to easily toggle between performance and quiet modes without software
  • Strong 1080p and respectable 1440p gaming performance, especially when using DLSS

What customers don't like about ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming

  • Physical size is very large (2.7-slot design), which may cause compatibility issues with smaller cases
  • Noticeable GPU sag reported by some users due to the weight and length of the card
  • Subtle RGB lighting that may be underwhelming for users looking for a flashy aesthetic
  • Higher MSRP compared to other 'no-frills' RTX 3060 models, often carrying a brand premium
  • Size of the triple-fan cooler can be seen as 'overkill' for a mid-range GPU like the 3060

Verdict

The ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 3060 is an NVIDIA Ampere-based graphics card featuring 12GB of GDDR6 VRAM, 3,584 CUDA cores, and a 192-bit memory interface, delivering a boost clock up to 1882 MHz in OC mode. Its triple-fan Axial-tech design, all-aluminum shroud, and metal backplate provide exceptional thermal performance and durability, while additional features like Dual BIOS and 0dB technology ensure quiet operation during light tasks. Main pros include its robust build quality, large 12GB memory capacity for high-texture 1080p and 1440p gaming, and efficient cooling that keeps temperatures well under load. However, its 2.7-slot width may be too bulky for compact cases, and it struggle with demanding 4K gaming at maximum settings.

Compare ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming 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 TUF GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found