Gameplay Performance – 1080p
We are going to focus on the 1080p gameplay performance on this page, with Ray Tracing on the next page, and 1440p on the following page. We will include DLSS and FSR performance on the same graph in the games that are supported. We will use DLSS on these two NVIDIA GPUs. For video card comparisons we are reviewing the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti versus GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER.
Returnal
Returnal was launched on the PC in February of 2023 and is based on Unreal Engine 4. The game supports real-time ray tracing effects, particle systems, and volumetric rendering. We utilize the graphics preset to set EPIC graphics settings with unlocked framerate, and everything is enabled except ray tracing, we have screen-space reflections on. We use the built-in benchmark.
In Returnal, at 1080p and EPIC game settings, the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti is 43% faster than the GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER from 2019. Now, interestingly, the GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is indeed playable in this game at over 60FPS at 1080p with EPIC settings, but the new RTX 4060 Ti does get you to almost 100FPS. With DLSS performance, the DLSS performance of the RTX 4060 Ti is 41% faster than the RTX 2060 SUPER with DLSS.
Forspoken
Forspoken was released on January 24th, 2023, on the PC and uses the Luminous Engine. The game supports all upscaling methods and Ray Tracing. We are going to customize the settings and enable the highest graphics settings, including Ultra High Texture Memory. We use the built-in benchmark.
In Forspoken, the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti improves performance over the GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER by 53%, which is more significant than in Returnal. In this game, it matters a lot more, as the RTX 2060 SUPER couldn’t provide 60FPS even at 1080p, but the RTX 4060 Ti can push it up to over 80FPS, which is a very decent upgrade in performance. The DLSS performance of the RTX 4060 Ti is 43% faster than the RTX 2060 SUPER with DLSS.
The Callisto Protocol
The Callisto Protocol was released in December of 2022 on the PC and is based on Unreal Engine 4. We run the game in DX12 mode with unlimited framerate, and all graphics settings enabled and at the highest graphics settings. This game supports ray tracing, and FSR upscaling only, we use FSR2 for testing. We use the built-in benchmark.
In The Callisto Protocol, the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti is 58% faster than the GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER, which is even greater than the first two games above. This game only supports FSR, but the FSR performance of the RTX 4060 Ti is 55% faster than the RTX 2060 SUPER with FSR. Also interesting, the RTX 4060 Ti gains more performance using FSR than the RTX 2060 SUPER does, thanks to the greater amount of cores on the RTX 4060 Ti, which FSR is hitting pretty hard. The RTX 2060 SUPER gets hurt more, enabling FSR, then the RTX 4060 Ti does.
Call of Duty Modern Warfare II
Call of Duty Modern Warfare II was released on October 27, 2022, on the PC and uses the IW 9.0 gaming engine. The game supports all upscaling methods and we use the highest quality option of each. We customize every graphics setting to the maximum value for the best image quality and enable everything. We use the built-in benchmark.
We see a very big difference in Call of Duty Modern Warfare II, the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti ups the performance by a whopping 81% versus the GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER. That is a pretty large performance jump in this game and brings playable performance from 60FPS up to almost 120FPS on average. With DLSS, the RTX 4060 Ti is 80% faster than the RTX 2060 SUPER with DLSS.
Chernobylite Enhanced Edition
Chernobylite, based on Unreal Engine 4, was released on the PC in 2021, but the Enhanced Edition update for the game was released in April 2022. The Enhanced Edition provides a visual overhaul of the game with better textures, plus introduces tessellation and ray tracing features. It features raytraced reflections, raytraced translucency, raytraced caustics, and raytraced dynamic diffuse global illumination. It supports upscaling, and we use the highest quality. We use the built-in benchmark.
In Chernobylite Enhanced Edition we find the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti performing 60% faster than the GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER at 1080p with Ultra graphics settings. While the RTX 2060 SUPER was already playable, the RTX 4060 Ti takes it to new heights. With DLSS, the RTX 4060 Ti is 62% faster than the RTX 2060 SUPER with DLSS.
Dying Light 2
Dying Light 2 was released in February 2022 on the PC and uses Techland’s C-Engine. The game supports Ray Tracing, DLSS, and FSR2. We use the built-in preset to set “HIGH QUALITY” which sets the highest game graphics, without Ray Tracing. We manually enable DX12 and ASYNC Compute. We use the built-in benchmark.
In Dying Light 2, the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti is 55% faster than the GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER at 1080p with the highest image quality. With DLSS, the RTX 4060 Ti is 42% faster than the RTX 2060 SUPER with DLSS.
Cyberpunk 2077
Cyberpunk 2077 was released in December 2020 and uses the REDengine 4. We have the game patched to version 1.62 and utilize the built-in benchmark. We test using the Graphics Preset option to set graphics settings to “Ultra”. We utilize the highest quality upscaling.
Cyberpunk 2077 is demanding at 1080p at Ultra, but the GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER actually does very well at 1080p at 68FPS. The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti offers 47% more performance over the GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER at 100FPS. It’s not as big as some other games, but it’s decent. The DLSS performance is higher on the RTX 4060 Ti versus the RTX 2060 SUPER though, and with DLSS the RTX 4060 Ti is 49% faster than the RTX 2060 SUPER.
Discussion (6 replies)
Join Discussion →Love the review and thank you.
Doing some numbers something stood out to me and it REALLY shows when you compare the target max MHZ between the two cards.
the 4060 is pushing 2535 and the 2070 is pushing 1650, This is a raw difference clock per clock of 53.6.
When we are NOT doing RT work the % of improvement for games at 1080p averages out to 45.3%. This leads me to believe most actual improvement to performance and efficiency is through process node efficiency and not redesign or IPC improvement of the actual rasterization cores. But when you take into account that they ALSO doubled the cuda cores to reach that number... is even more interesting.
This is weird... They doubled the cuda core count
Increased peak MHZ by 53.6%
Nicely brought down the power envelope.
But for DOUBLE the cuda cores running at just over 50% the mhz rating... if the IPC remained the same I would have expected a more linear progression in performance.
So it seems like they DID make some changes to the cuda cores themselves, for efficiency but had to claw back performance through more cores and more mhz taking away some of that efficiency gain. Actually theoretically 100% of the potential gain considering the real performance improvement is more in line with the MHZ as opposed to the DOUBLED cuda core count.
Something does not smell right here with these numbers. We're missing a part of the story. The end user is getting lesser performant cores core to core... if the had left the core counts equal and counted on only generational improvements (not including DLSS I didn't crunch those numbers) a 2070 to 4060 would have been a rasterization downgrade.
I need to run similar numbers for AMD's cards in a generational comparison.
Would have been interesting to include these 3 cards also in the comparison & make it a 5 way battle
2060 12gb
3060 12gb
4060 ti 16gb
Idea is to identify bottlenecks with 8gb vram
For example in Ratchet & Clank in 1080p ultra (RT off) the 2060 12gb almost matches the 8gb 4060 ti !!!
Search engine optimization rules the day - will probably focus on more 1:1 matchups for now. The aim here is to look at upgrade scenarios....
Great writeup!
Grim brings up a good point - the 4060 shows about a 50% improvement in performance, but that 50% increase in clock speed ~and~ core count - the math doesn't seem to add up without drawing the conclusion that you just need to pack more slower (yet more efficient) cores to make Turing work. It's an interesting thing to note, if nothing else. Maybe that's why JSH is saying Moore's law is dead...?
Also - for ~most~ people (not enthusiasts here who chase the absolute top of the performance curve) - I usually recommend they upgrade to something that doubles their existing GPU performance. In the past that was every 2-3 generations, at roughly the same tier/price they had previously paid. Now, starting with RTX, that has been thrown out the window.
nVidia obviously wants you to pay a premium for Raytracing performance. I've never thought it was worth it, but to those that do - it's your money, buy what you like. But for folks that have cards from Pascal and newer, it's been hard to recommend anything to upgrade to without utterly blowing through budgets or accepting much smaller (rasterizing) performance gains.
Thanks, @Brent_Justice for the great comparative write-up. It's bummer about the PCIe and VRAM details but otherwise a solid upgrade in keeping at the exact same price point.
I had gotten a 2080 SUPER back then as a slight upgrade to a 1080 Ti and also so I could enjoy using G-Sync with an LG C9. While mostly a sideways move it had some impressive improvements for the day with RT and DLSS when gaming at 1440p. It even cost me somewhere around $50-100 less than what I paid for the 1080 Ti and only needed 2x 8-pin connectors vs 3x 8-pin for the 1080 Ti. I always cringed at the "SUPER" name but otherwise really had a good experience with that card.
Very nice review, thank you. I've been looking to get a lower tier card at some point for a back up rig again, and this review does help.