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

GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£290VRAM:12 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):170 W

GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 15 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC
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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

40%

6.1

Technical score

25%

8.1

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

9.4

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 54% of graphics cards
7.8

Value for money

Value for money
7.8/ 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
Score components

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

9.0

Price

▲Better than 86%
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
Score components

44%

4.2

Performance

24%

5.6

Memory

12%

9.4

Power

11%

9.2

Features

5%

9.0

Design

4%

8.5

Connectivity

▼Worse than 70%
8.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.1/ 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

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

8.8

Popularity

Grades by review (15)
5 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 10 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.
▲Better than 60%
?

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

What reviewers say about the GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC

Based on 5 · 10

Reviewers praise its solid build, good cooling and attractive design, but feel rival cards offer better value and question the price.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading...
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC

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
Score components:

44%

4.2

Performance

24%

5.6

Memory

12%

9.4

Power

11%

9.2

Features

5%

9.0

Design

4%

8.5

Connectivity

6.1
Reviews score
8.1
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.8/ 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
Score components:

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

9.0

Price

7.8
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
9,000 points
This graphics card scores 9,000 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 74.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
5,180 points
This graphics card scores 5,180 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 72% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
16,618 points
This graphics card scores 16,618 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 70.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
8,299 points
This graphics card scores 8,299 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 69.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
13.17 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 13.17 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 67.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
12 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
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
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
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
What reviewers say
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
What reviewers say
Max displays supported
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
2
This graphics card offers 2 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 78.3% of graphics cards and equal to 9.8% 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
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
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
223 W
This graphics card draws 223 W under peak load, which is higher than 52.3% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
550 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
212 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 212 W, which is lower than that of 54.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
170 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
282x 117x 41 mm
Length
282 mm
This graphics card is 282 mm long, which is shorter than 50.1% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.6% of graphics cards.
Height
41 mm
This graphics card is 41 mm tall, which is shorter than 98.2% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
770 g
This graphics card weighs 770 g, which is lighter than 73.3% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of Graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say

GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 84 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (41 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    41 mm vs 125 mm
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 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

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    8.8

    Popularity

    Grades by review (15)
    5 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 10 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.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 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
  • 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.
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 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

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    8.8

    Popularity

    Grades by review (15)
    5 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 10 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.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • 20.5% higher sentiment score
    9.4 vs 7.8
  • 5.1% better value for money
    GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC has better value for money than the average graphics card (7.79 vs 7.4).
    7.79 vs 7.41
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 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
  • 7 °C lower load temperature
    This graphics card has a lower load temperature than the average graphics card (60 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    60 °C vs 67 °C
  • 84 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (41 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    41 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 26.7% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,837 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,837 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
  • 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
  • 45.6% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (205.7 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    205.7 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 26.7% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,837 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,837 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
  • 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
  • 45.6% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (205.7 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    205.7 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 45.3% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (88.2 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    88.18 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
  • 41.7% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (13.2 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    13.17 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
  • 39.1% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (9,000 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    9,000 points vs 14,779 points
  • 26.6% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (16,618 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    16,618 points vs 22,638 points
  • 2 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2021 vs 2023).
    January 2021
    2021 vs 2023
  • 43.4% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (5,180 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    5,180 points vs 9,148 points
  • 56.1% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (13 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    12.96 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.
  • 1 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    2 vs 3
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 11 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (48 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    48 °C vs 37 °C

Video reviews

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

8.0
TheOverclocker
≈ estimated
02/05/2021
Hands-on review · power, temperatures and overclocking
Verdict
GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC is a fair card worth considering if you find it at a decent price.
4.0
Laurent's Choice
≈ estimated
23/03/2021
Hands-on review · performance, price and mining tests
Verdict
GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC is not worth buying over an RTX 2060, especially at its inflated street price.
8.0
Inspire2Rise
≈ estimated
02/03/2021
Unboxing and hands-on review · game frame rates and pricing
Verdict
GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC is a strong pick for a new PC, with price and miner demand as the main caveats.
9.0
Vortez
≈ estimated
25/02/2021
Hands-on review · 1080p benchmarks, temperature and noise tests
Verdict
GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC is a good pick for 1080p gaming, with strong cooling and low noise in a low-key design.
4.0
We Do Tech
≈ estimated
25/02/2021
Hands-on review · benchmarks against GTX 1060 and 3060 Ti
Verdict
GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC is not worth buying; the RTX 3060 Ti is a much better choice.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
vortez.net
≈ estimated
25/02/2021
Lab test · Budget 1080p card
Verdict
The Gigabyte RTX 3060 Gaming OC is a quiet card for 1080p gamers who want ray tracing, but it struggles at maximum detail without DLSS.
9.0
gameblur.net
✓ explicit
31/05/2021
Tech review · Budget 1080p card
Verdict
The Gigabyte RTX 3060 Gaming OC is a strong 1080p card that holds 60 FPS in Control with maximum settings, but an RTX 3060 Ti or 3070 will last longer.
9.0
vortez.net
≈ estimated
25/02/2021
Benchmark review · 1080p card
Verdict
The Gigabyte RTX 3060 Gaming OC is a quiet 1080p card for ray tracing, but it struggles at maximum detail without DLSS and needs the Ti for native 1440p.
7.0
heise.de
✓ explicit
13/11/2021
Lab test · Full HD gaming card
Verdict
The Gigabyte RTX 3060 Gaming OC 12G suits Full HD gaming with ray tracing and 12 GB of memory, but falls behind the RTX 3060 Ti at higher resolutions.
9.0
profesionalreview.com
✓ explicit
25/02/2021
Teardown review · Quiet triple-fan card
Verdict
The Gigabyte RTX 3060 Gaming OC 12G is a quiet mid-range card with 12 GB of memory and a slim body, sitting just below the RTX 3060 Ti.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC

  • Generous 12GB VRAM provides excellent headroom for modern games and content creation workloads like video editing.
  • Strong 1080p performance, capable of running AAA titles at high or ultra settings with smooth frame rates.
  • Efficient Windforce 3X cooling system keeps temperatures low, typically under 70°C even during intense gaming sessions.
  • Quiet operation thanks to a well-tuned fan curve and semi-passive cooling that stops fans at low loads.
  • Simple power requirements with a single 8-pin PCIe connector, making it compatible with most standard power supplies.
  • Solid build quality featuring a metal backplate for added rigidity and protection.

What customers don't like about GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC

  • Underwhelming ray tracing performance, often requiring DLSS to maintain playable frame rates in demanding titles.
  • Lacks support for DLSS 3 Frame Generation, a key feature exclusive to the newer RTX 4000 series.
  • Older architecture results in higher power consumption compared to more efficient current-gen alternatives.
  • Performance at 4K resolution is poor, requiring significant compromises in graphical settings.
  • Value is highly dependent on market pricing, as it often sits too close in price to the faster RTX 4060.
  • Relatively large physical size (approx. 282mm) may not fit into smaller mini-ITX cases.

Verdict

The Gigabyte GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC is a high-performance mid-range graphics card based on the NVIDIA Ampere architecture, featuring 3,584 CUDA cores and a factory-overclocked boost clock of 1837 MHz. It is equipped with 12GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing ample VRAM for both modern 1080p/1440p gaming and creative workloads. Key characteristics include the Windforce 3X cooling system with alternate spinning fans for efficient heat dissipation, RGB Fusion 2.0 for customizable aesthetics, and support for advanced technologies like Ray Tracing (2nd Gen) and DLSS (3rd Gen Tensor Cores). Its main pros are the massive 12GB VRAM buffer—which exceeds even some higher-tier cards—excellent thermal management, and quiet operation under load. However, its primary cons include a relatively narrow memory interface that can bottleneck performance at higher resolutions and underwhelming native 4K gaming capabilities in demanding AAA titles.

Compare GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC 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 GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming OC and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found