Gameplay Performance – 1080p Ray Tracing
We are going to focus on the 1080p gameplay performance on this page with Ray Tracing enabled, which will give the cards a challenge, especially the older RTX 2060 SUPER. 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 an unlocked framerate, and everything is enabled. For ray tracing tests we have enabled Ray Traced Shadows and Reflections at EPIC settings. We use the built-in benchmark.
In Returnal, we have turned on EPIC Ray Tracing and the GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER doesn’t do as bad as we had imagined, in this game, but the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti does offer 55% higher performance with Ray Tracing. The gains with DLSS are also higher on the RTX 4060 Ti, and the DLSS performance is 51% 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 are going to enable both Ray Tracing options, Shadows, and Ambient Occlusion. We use the built-in benchmark.
Forspoken gets hit pretty hard on the older GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER at 44FPS at 1080p, the new GeForce RTX 4060 Ti is however less faster than other games, at only 36% faster. The difference between them isn’t as large here as in other games. However, the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti does gain a lot more performance with DLSS, than the RTX 2060 SUPER does. With DLSS, the RTX 4060 Ti is 48% 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. For Ray Tracing we enable Ray Traced Shadows, Ray Traced Transmission, and Ray Traced Reflections to High. We use the built-in benchmark.
Unlike Forspoken, we see an absolutely huge difference in Ray Tracing performance in The Callisto Protocol. We see a very large 95% performance difference here, with the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti providing a 95% performance uplift versus the older GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER. With FSR the RTX 4060 Ti is 82% faster than the RTX 2060 SUPER. We also see a bigger gain with FSR performance with the RTX 4060 Ti versus the RTX 2060 SUPER.
Chernobylite Enhanced Edition
Chernobylite was released on the PC in 2021, but the free 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. The game is based on Unreal Engine 4. For our Ray Tracing test, we have enabled the Ultra Ray Tracing option.
The older GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER gets annihilated in Chernobylite Enhanced Edition with Ultra Ray Tracing due to Global Illumination Ray Tracing. The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti handles Ray Tracing a lot better and ends up being 126% faster than the older GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER. This game shows how truly the Ray Tracing performance upgrade differs when Ray Traced Global Illumination is used. The RTX 4060 Ti with DLSS is 86% 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. This game supports Ray Tracing environmental effects including Ray Traced Soft Shadows, Ray Traced Ambient Occlusion, Ray Traced Global Illumination, and Ray Traced Reflections. We utilize the built-in preset option to set “HIGH-QUALITY RAYTRACING” which enables the game’s highest graphics settings plus the environmental effects explained above at the highest values. The game is run in DX12 Ultimate mode with ASYNC Compute turned on. We use the built-in benchmark.
Dying Light 2 is graphically demanding with High Quality Ray Tracing, even at 1080p, only the newer GeForce RTX 4060 Ti is able to play it at a playable gameplay experience. The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti is 82% faster than the older GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER which is not playable. We also see a huge gain with DLSS on the RTX 4060 Ti and a much lesser gain on the RTX 2060 SUPER. The RTX 4060 Ti with DLSS is 72% 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 use the built-in benchmark. We test using the Graphics Preset option to set graphics settings. We use the Ray Tracing Graphics Preset of either: “Ray Tracing: Low”, or “Ray Tracing: Medium” or “Ray Tracing: Ultra” as indicated. This game supports DLSS and FSR2.
Cyberpunk 2077 is of course very demanding at “Ultra” Ray Tracing even at 1080p. The GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is definitely not playable, and even the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti struggles and needs DLSS to be playable with Ray Tracing in this game. The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti is 92% faster than the GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER. With DLSS, the RTX 4060 Ti is 91% faster than the RTX 2060 SUPER with DLSS.
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.