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

ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£290VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):115 W

ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 3 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo
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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 76% 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%

9.3

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 76% of graphics cards
7.4

Value for money

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

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

9.0

Price

▼Worse than 54%
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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 73% of models
Score components

44%

5.0

Performance

24%

4.0

Memory

12%

7.9

Power

11%

9.4

Features

5%

9.0

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

▼Worse 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 83% of models

6.0

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

80%

7.7

Average grade

20%

7.4

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
3 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.
▼Worse 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
  • zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
  • zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
  • zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
  • zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
  • zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
  • zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
  • zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
  • zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
zotac-gaming-geforce-rtx-4060-solo
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What owners say about the ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo

Based on 197 owners sharing their experience in online comments

78%positive15%mixed7%negative

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

What owners dislike

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

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo

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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 73% of models
Score components:

44%

5.0

Performance

24%

4.0

Memory

12%

7.9

Power

11%

9.4

Features

5%

9.0

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

6.0
Reviews score
6.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components:

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

9.0

Price

7.4
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
10,626 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 10,626 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 67.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
6,087 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 6,087 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 66.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
24,168 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 24,168 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 55.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
9,185 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 9,185 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 63.9% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
15.11 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 15.11 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 63.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 56.8% of graphics cards and equal to 25.7% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
272 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 272 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 76.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.2% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
17,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 17,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 61% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.3% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.5% of graphics cards and equal to 50.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x8
This graphics card uses x8 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 75.9% of graphics cards and equal to 22.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 17% 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
32.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 32.4 Gbps, which is faster than on 56.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
115 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 115 W, which is lower than that of 85.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.7% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
115 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 115 W under peak load, which is lower than 87.4% of graphics cards and equal to 2% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
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
115 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 115 W, which is lower than that of 87.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.2% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
115 W
Show more
Size
163x 117.6x 39.5 mm
Length
163 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 163 mm long, which is shorter than 97.1% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Height
117.6 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 117.6 mm tall, which is shorter than 68.1% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.1% 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
480 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 480 g, which is lighter than 91.8% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of Graphics cards.
Show more

ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 46.5% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (115 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    115 W vs 215 W
  • 119.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (163 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    163 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 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
  • 21.4% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,125 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,125 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 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
  • 47.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (115 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    115 W vs 220 W
  • 19.2% higher sentiment score
    9.3 vs 7.8
  • 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
  • 19.2% higher sentiment score
    9.3 vs 7.8
  • 21.4% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,125 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,125 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 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
  • 46.5% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (115 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    115 W vs 215 W
  • 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
  • 47.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (115 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    115 W vs 220 W
  • 47.7% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (115 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    115 W vs 220 W
  • 7 °C lower idle temperature
    This graphics card has a lower idle temperature than the average graphics card (30 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    30 °C vs 37 °C
  • 119.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (163 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    163 mm vs 282.2 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
  • 7.4 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (117.6 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    117.6 mm vs 125 mm
  • 52.7% lighter
    This graphics card is lighter than the average graphics card (480 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    480 g vs 1,014 g
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 16 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    24 vs 40
  • 88 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (96 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    96 vs 184
  • 16 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    24 vs 40
  • 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
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 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
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 83% of models

    6.0

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

    80%

    7.7

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    3 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
  • 16 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    24 vs 40
  • 88 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (96 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    96 vs 184
  • 16 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    24 vs 40
  • 37.5% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (236.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    236.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 26.8% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (118.1 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    118.1 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 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
  • 1.8% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,460 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,460 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 48 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (96 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    96 vs 144
  • 33.1% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (15.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    15.11 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 28.1% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (10,626 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    10,626 points vs 14,779 points
  • 4.7% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,830 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,830 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 33.5% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (6,087 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    6,087 points vs 9,148 points
  • 50% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.2 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.24 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 39.3% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (272 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    272 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 10.5% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (17,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    17,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • 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
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 9.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (45 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    45 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

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

9.0
Mike's unboxing, reviews and how to
≈ estimated
03/07/2024
Hands-on review · frame rates, temperatures and power draw
Verdict
ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo suits tiny small-form-factor builds, but most buyers will want a bigger card.
7.0
Manong's Unboxing
≈ estimated
04/09/2023
Unboxing and benchmarks · temperatures and frame rates
Verdict
ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo is a decent choice for its price range, but an AMD card may suit budget builds better.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Overview video
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo

  • Ultra-compact ITX form factor (163mm length) fits in 99% of cases, including sub-5L SFF builds
  • Highly power efficient with a low 115W TDP, often requiring only a 500W power supply
  • Excellent 1080p gaming performance with support for DLSS 3 and Frame Generation
  • Operates surprisingly cool for a single-fan card, idling around 30°C and reaching ~64°C under load
  • Includes AV1 encoding/decoding support, making it a strong choice for budget streamers and video editors
  • Competitive pricing, typically available at the base MSRP ($299/£280) without a small-form-factor premium

What customers don't like about ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo

  • Single-fan design can be louder and more prone to mechanical vibration or humming compared to dual-fan models
  • Limited to 8GB of VRAM and a 128-bit bus, which can cause performance stutters or 'stuttery messes' in memory-heavy games at 1440p or 4K
  • Modest generational performance gains over the previous RTX 3060 in raw rasterization
  • Lacks a metal backplate, featuring a bare PCB that some users find less premium or aesthetically pleasing
  • No 'Freeze Fan Stop' technology on this specific model; the fan typically rotates even at idle unless manually tuned
  • Performance is noticeably worse on older PCIe 3.0 systems due to the restricted x8 interface

Verdict

The Zotac Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo is an ultra-compact, ITX-sized graphics card measuring just 163mm (6.4 inches) in length, specifically designed for small form factor (SFF) builds. Powered by the NVIDIA Ada Lovelace architecture, it features 3,072 CUDA cores, 8GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, and a boost clock of 2,460 MHz. Its primary strengths include exceptional power efficiency with a low 115W TDP, support for DLSS 3 frame generation and 3rd generation ray tracing, and a quiet single-fan cooling system that fits easily into 99% of PC cases. However, notable drawbacks include the limited 8GB VRAM which may struggle with high-resolution textures in modern AAA titles at 1440p, and a reliance on its 128-bit memory bus which can bottleneck performance compared to cards with wider bandwidth.

Compare ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo 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 ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4060 Solo and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found