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

Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Pink Star OC 8GB review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£380VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):160 W

Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Pink Star OC 8GB Review: Compare 117 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

7.3/10

Overall score

Score
7.3/ 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 53% of models
Score components

40%

6.7

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.6, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

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

10%

8.8

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 53% of graphics cards
7.7

Value for money

Value for money
7.7/ 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–² Better than 75% of models
Score components

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

8.5

Price

â–²Better than 75%
6.7

Technical score

Technical score
6.7/ 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 58% of models
Score components

44%

6.1

Performance

24%

4.2

Memory

12%

9.6

Power

11%

9.5

Features

5%

6.9

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 58%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
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
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.6.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

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
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £380
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 Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Pink Star OC 8GB

Based on 151 owners sharing their experience in online comments

77%positive13%mixed10%negative

Owners praise its efficient gaming and AI performance, while price and limited memory cause the most frustration.

What owners dislike

  • Many owners feel the price is high for the performance, especially at launch, and say it was better value when it dropped to around 400 to 450 dollars or euros.14
  • Games that use more than 8GB of VRAM stutter, freeze, or run out of memory at higher settings, so owners of the 8GB version report problems in newer titles.7
  • Owners report games crashing or freezing when VRAM fills up, for example in Resident Evil 4 and Spider-Man Remastered, and some report crashes with ray tracing enabled.3
  • Owners say it is a 1080p card rather than a 1440p card, and say 1440p or 4K performance drops below expectations in demanding games.3

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Pink Star OC 8GB

Technical score
Technical score
6.7/ 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 58% of models
Score components:

44%

6.1

Performance

24%

4.2

Memory

12%

9.6

Power

11%

9.5

Features

5%

6.9

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

6.7
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.7/ 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–² Better than 75% of models
Score components:

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

8.5

Price

7.7
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
13,552 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 13,552 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 53.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
11,780 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 11,780 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 60.8% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
22,638 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 22,638 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 48.9% of graphics cards and equal to 1.3% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
12,071 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 12,071 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 50% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
22.98 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 22.98 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 50.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% 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
288 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 288 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 69.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
18,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 18,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 51.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.9% 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
?
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
160 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 160 W, which is lower than that of 67.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.8% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
160 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 160 W under peak load, which is lower than 71.4% of graphics cards and equal to 3.8% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
500 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 500 W PSU, which is lower than that of 75.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.8% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
160 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 160 W, which is lower than that of 71.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 3.7% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
160 W
Show more
Size
328x 141x 52 mm
Length
328 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 328 mm long, which is longer than 79.7% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.4% of graphics cards.
Height
126.5 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 126.5 mm tall, which is taller than 53.9% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.1% 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
?
Show more

Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Pink Star OC 8GB vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 5.4% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,640 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,640 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 20.3% higher base clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher base GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,310 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    2,310 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 28.6% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 25.6% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (160 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    160 W vs 215 W
  • 4x higher HDMI bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher HDMI bandwidth than the average graphics card (48 Gbps vs 12 Gbps). The average graphics card has HDMI bandwidth of 12 Gbps.
    48 Gbps vs 12 Gbps
  • 27.3% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (160 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    160 W vs 220 W
  • 12.8% higher sentiment score
    8.8 vs 7.8
  • 5.4% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,640 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,640 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 20.3% higher base clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher base GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,310 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    2,310 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 28.6% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 4x higher HDMI bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher HDMI bandwidth than the average graphics card (48 Gbps vs 12 Gbps). The average graphics card has HDMI bandwidth of 12 Gbps.
    48 Gbps vs 12 Gbps
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 25.6% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (160 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    160 W vs 215 W
  • 27.3% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (160 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    160 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
  • 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
  • 35.7% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 48 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (136 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    136 vs 184
  • 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
  • 6 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (34 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    34 vs 40
  • 48 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (136 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    136 vs 184
  • 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
  • 6 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (34 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    34 vs 40
  • 6 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (34 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    34 vs 40
  • 21.5% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (126.7 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    126.7 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 5% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (359 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    359 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 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
  • 35.7% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 5.3% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (18,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    18,000 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
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 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
  • 45.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (328 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    328 mm vs 282.2 mm

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Pink Star OC 8GB

  • High energy efficiency with significantly lower power consumption than previous generations
  • Excellent performance for 1080p gaming, often reaching high frame rates in modern titles
  • Effective cooling system that remains cool and quiet even under intensive gaming loads
  • Compact dual-fan design suitable for small form factor (SFF) and ITX case builds
  • Support for modern features like DLSS 3 Frame Generation and AV1 encoding
  • Unique pink aesthetic that stands out from standard black or grey hardware

What customers don't like about Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Pink Star OC 8GB

  • 8GB of VRAM is considered insufficient for high-resolution gaming or future-proofing
  • Minimal raw performance improvement over its predecessor, the RTX 3060 Ti
  • Performance drops significantly at resolutions higher than 1080p due to a narrow 128-bit memory bus
  • Perceived poor value for money at its standard retail price compared to older or competing GPUs
  • May require a support bracket to prevent GPU sag due to its build
  • Limited effectiveness for heavy content creation or complex projects requiring higher memory capacity

Verdict

The Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Pink Star OC 8GB is a mid-range graphics card built on the ultra-efficient Ada Lovelace architecture, featuring 4,352 CUDA cores and a factory-overclocked boost speed of up to 2640 MHz. It utilizes 8GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with an effective 18 Gbps speed, and connects via a PCI-Express 4.0 x8 interface. Its primary characteristics include support for DLSS 3 frame generation, third-generation ray tracing, and a unique pink-themed aesthetic with a triple-fan cooling system. Main pros are its high power efficiency with a 160W TGP, silent fan operation under low loads, and excellent 1080p performance. However, notable cons include the limited 8GB VRAM and narrow memory bus which can bottleneck performance at 1440p or 4K resolutions in modern titles.

Compare Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Pink Star OC 8GB 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 Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Pink Star OC 8GB and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found