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

MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 8GB review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£440VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):160 W

MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 8GB Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 10 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 8GB
7.1/10

Overall score

Score
7.1/ 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 63% of models
Score components

40%

6.7

Technical score

25%

6.7

Reviews score

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

▼Worse than 63% 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%

7.1

Overall score

30%

8.2

Price

▼Worse than 54%
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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 57% of models
Score components

44%

6.1

Performance

24%

4.2

Memory

12%

9.3

Power

11%

9.5

Features

5%

8.8

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

▼Worse than 57%
6.7

Reviews score

Reviews score
6.7/ 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 74% of models

6.7

Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.5

Average grade

20%

8.6

Popularity

Grades by review (10)
9 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 1 video review, 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.
▼Worse than 74%
?

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
  • msi-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-gaming-x-8gb
msi-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-gaming-x-8gb
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 reviewers say about the MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 8GB

Based on 9 · 1

Reviewers praise the strong, quiet cooling and efficiency, but criticise the limited video memory, bulky size and underwhelming performance.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 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 MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 57% of models
Score components:

44%

6.1

Performance

24%

4.2

Memory

12%

9.3

Power

11%

9.5

Features

5%

8.8

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

6.7
Reviews score
6.7
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%

7.1

Overall score

30%

8.2

Price

7.4
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
13,418 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 13,418 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 56.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
9,000 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 9,000 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 51% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% 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
12,074 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 12,074 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 50.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.7% 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
What reviewers say
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
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
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
What reviewers say
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
1.62 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 1.62 Gbps, which is slower than on 95.4% of graphics cards and equal to 1% of graphics cards.
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
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
190 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 190 W, which is lower than that of 58.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.9% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
160 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
247x 130x 42 mm
Length
247 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 247 mm long, which is shorter than 70.2% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.8% of graphics cards.
Height
130 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 130 mm tall, which is taller than 59.3% of graphics cards and equal in height to 2.8% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 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
661 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 661 g, which is lighter than 81.9% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of Graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say

MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 35.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (247 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    247 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 8x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (32 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    32 MB vs 4 MB
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 7.8 dB quieter under load
    This graphics card has a lower load noise level than the average graphics card (27.6 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    27.6 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 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
  • 35.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (247 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    247 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 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
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 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
  • 6.9% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.7/ 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 74% of models

    6.7

    Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.5

    Average grade

    20%

    8.6

    Popularity

    Grades by review (10)
    9 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 1 video review, 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.
    6.7 vs 7.2
  • 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
  • 10.6% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (337.9 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    337.9 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
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • 92.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (1.6 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    1.62 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 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 dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 5 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (130 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    130 mm vs 125 mm

Video reviews

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

4.0
iVadim UNBOX
≈ estimated
07/04/2024
Hands-on review · VRAM and ray tracing tests at 1080p
Verdict
The MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 8GB isn't worth it; the 16 GB version is the better buy.
Brand video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

5.0
club386.com
≈ estimated
15/06/2023
Lab test · 1080p gaming
Verdict
The MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X Trio runs cool and quiet at 1080p, but its oversized cooler and modest gain over the RTX 3060 Ti hold it back.
7.5
hothardware.com
✓ explicit
24/05/2023
Hands-on test · Triple-fan cooler
Verdict
The MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X Trio is cool, quiet, and needs just one 8-pin connector, but its oversized cooler suits big cases better than compact builds.
7.0
guru3d.com
≈ estimated
24/05/2023
Benchmark test · Factory overclock
Verdict
The MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X Trio is a quiet, well-built card with a factory overclock, but its 8GB of memory holds it back above 1080p.
overclockers.com
24/05/2023
Not graded yet
7.0
hardwareluxx.de
≈ estimated
24/05/2023
Lab test · Triple-fan card
Verdict
The MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X Trio runs cool and nearly silent, but its 338mm length and 2.2-slot cooler need a roomy case.
9.0
hardwareinside.de
≈ estimated
23/01/2025
Hands-on test · Installation and software
Verdict
The MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X Trio 8G suits Full HD players, with a big cooler and RGB lighting run through MSI Center software.
9.4
geeknetic.es
✓ explicit
24/05/2023
Review · Efficiency and temperatures
Verdict
The MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X Trio hits high frame rates in Full HD with DLSS 3, but 8GB of memory and a bulky body hold it back.
7.0
smartworld.it
≈ estimated
24/05/2023
Review · Full HD performance
Verdict
The MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X Trio plays Full HD games smoothly and stays very cool, but performance is a bit below expectations.
8.0
techgaming.nl
✓ explicit
24/05/2023
Benchmark review · Cooling and noise
Verdict
The MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X Trio is cool and quiet, but the card falls behind the RTX 3070 in several games and is hard to recommend.
8.0
xgn.nl
✓ explicit
15/07/2023
Review · Performance and memory
Verdict
The MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X Trio runs games smoothly at 1080p and 1440p with DLSS, but its 8GB of memory may age quickly.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 8GB

  • Excellent cooling and low operating temperatures (rarely exceeding 65°C)
  • Extremely quiet operation, including 'Zero Frozr' fan stop technology at low loads
  • High power efficiency with low energy consumption (TDP around 160W)
  • Significant performance boost in DLSS 3 supported titles
  • Sleek and attractive design with customisable RGB lighting
  • Compact form factor suitable for many PC case sizes

What customers don't like about MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 8GB

  • Limited 8GB VRAM is considered insufficient for long-term future-proofing and high-resolution textures
  • 128-bit memory bus can bottleneck performance at higher resolutions like 1440p and 4K
  • High MSRP makes it poor value compared to previous-generation cards or competitors
  • Marginal raw performance improvement over the older RTX 3060 Ti in non-DLSS tasks
  • Lack of DisplayPort 2.1 support (uses the older 1.4a standard)

Verdict

The MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 8GB is a high-performance mid-range graphics card built on the NVIDIA Ada Lovelace architecture, featuring 4,352 CUDA cores and a factory-overclocked boost clock of 2,640 MHz (extendable to 2,655 MHz via MSI Center). It is equipped with 8GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with an 18 Gbps speed, and it utilizes the Twin Frozr 9 cooling system with Torx Fan 5.0 for quiet and efficient thermal management. Main pros include exceptional power efficiency with a 160W TDP, support for DLSS 3 Frame Generation for significantly boosted frame rates, and a premium build featuring customizable RGB lighting and a reinforced metal backplate. Primary cons are the relatively high price premium over MSRP models and the 8GB VRAM capacity, which may limit performance in some modern AAA titles at high resolutions or ultra settings.

Compare MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 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 MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X 8GB and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found