Radeon R9 295X2 vs GeForce RTX 4060
Radeon R9 295X2
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 4060
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar GeForce RTX 4060
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 4060 is significantly newer (2023 vs 2014). The GeForce RTX 4060 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon R9 295X2 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 4060 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 123.8% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 295X2.
| Insight | Radeon R9 295X2 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-123.8%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+123.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | 🏆Elite Architecture (Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) / 5nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (307mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 4060 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $299 (vs $200), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 49.7% better value per dollar than the Radeon R9 295X2.
| Insight | Radeon R9 295X2 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+49.7%) |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($200) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($299) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R9 295X2 and GeForce RTX 4060
Radeon R9 295X2
The Radeon R9 295X2 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 29 2014. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1018 MHz. It has 2816 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 500W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,734 points. Launch price was $1,499.
GeForce RTX 4060
The GeForce RTX 4060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 18 2023. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 1830 MHz to 2460 MHz. It has 3072 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 115W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 24 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 19,548 points. Launch price was $299.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Radeon R9 295X2 scores 8,734 versus the GeForce RTX 4060's 19,548 — the GeForce RTX 4060 leads by 123.8%. The Radeon R9 295X2 is built on GCN 2.0 while the GeForce RTX 4060 uses Ada Lovelace, both on 28 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 2,816 (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 3,072 (GeForce RTX 4060). Raw compute: 5.733 TFLOPS ×2 (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 15.11 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4060). Boost clocks: 1018 MHz vs 2460 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,734 | 19,548+124% |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Ada Lovelace |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 2816 ×2 | 3072+9% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.733 TFLOPS ×2 | 15.11 TFLOPS+164% |
| Boost Clock | 1018 MHz | 2460 MHz+142% |
| ROPs | 64 ×2+33% | 48 |
| TMUs | 176 ×2+83% | 96 |
| L1 Cache | 0.69 MB | 3 MB+335% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 24 MB+2300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the GeForce RTX 4060 is support for DLSS 3 Frame Gen. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The Radeon R9 295X2 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 3.5 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | DLSS 3.0 (Native) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | Yes (DLSS 3.5) |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 8 GB of video memory. Memory bandwidth: 320 GB/s x2 (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 272 GB/s (GeForce RTX 4060) — a 1077.2% advantage for the Radeon R9 295X2. Bus width: 512-bit x2 vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 24 MB (GeForce RTX 4060) — the GeForce RTX 4060 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 320 GB/s x2+18% | 272 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 512-bit x2+300% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 24 MB+2300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 4060). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12 Ultimate |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.3+18% |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.6+7% |
| Max Displays | 6+50% | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 295X2) vs NVENC 8th gen (GeForce RTX 4060). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs NVDEC 5th gen. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (Radeon R9 295X2) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,AV1 (GeForce RTX 4060).
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | NVENC 8th gen |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | NVDEC 5th gen |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 | H.264,H.265/HEVC,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 295X2 draws 500W versus the GeForce RTX 4060's 115W — a 125.2% difference. The GeForce RTX 4060 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 1000W (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 550W (GeForce RTX 4060). Power connectors: 2x 8-pin vs 8-pin. Card length: 307mm vs 240mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 65°C vs 73°C.
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 500W | 115W-77% |
| Recommended PSU | 1000W | 550W-45% |
| Power Connector | 2x 8-pin | 8-pin |
| Length | 307mm | 240mm |
| Height | 114mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 65°C-11% | 73°C |
| Perf/Watt | 17.5 | 170.0+871% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 295X2 launched at $1499 MSRP and currently averages $200, while the GeForce RTX 4060 launched at $299 and now averages $299. The Radeon R9 295X2 costs 33.1% less ($99 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 43.7 (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 65.4 (GeForce RTX 4060) — the GeForce RTX 4060 offers 49.7% better value. The GeForce RTX 4060 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2014).
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1499 | $299-80% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $200-33% | $299 |
| Performance per Dollar | 43.7 | 65.4+50% |
| Codename | Vesuvius | AD107 |
| Release | April 29 2014 | May 18 2023 |
| Ranking | #303 | #84 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R9 295X2 and GeForce RTX 4060
