GeForce RTX 4060 vs GeForce GTX 295
GeForce RTX 4060
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 295
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 GeForce RTX 4060
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 295
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 4060 is significantly newer (2023 vs 2009). 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 GeForce GTX 295 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 1531.7% higher G3D Mark score and 357.1% more VRAM (8 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 295.
| Insight | GeForce RTX 4060 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1531.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1531.7%) |
| Longevity | 🏆Elite Architecture (Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) / 5nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2009 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 4060 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $299 (vs $50), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 172.9% better value per dollar than the GeForce GTX 295.
| Insight | GeForce RTX 4060 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+172.9%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($299) | ✅More affordable ($50) |
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 GeForce RTX 4060 and GeForce GTX 295
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.
GeForce GTX 295
The GeForce GTX 295 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 8 2009. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 576 MHz. It has 480 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 289W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,198 points. Launch price was $500.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce RTX 4060 scores 19,548 versus the GeForce GTX 295's 1,198 — the GeForce RTX 4060 leads by 1531.7%. The GeForce RTX 4060 is built on Ada Lovelace while the GeForce GTX 295 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 5 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 3,072 (GeForce RTX 4060) vs 480 (GeForce GTX 295). Raw compute: 15.11 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4060) vs 0.5962 TFLOPS ×2 (GeForce GTX 295).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 19,548+1532% | 1,198 |
| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 5 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 3072+540% | 480 ×2 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 15.11 TFLOPS+2434% | 0.5962 TFLOPS ×2 |
| ROPs | 48+71% | 28 ×2 |
| TMUs | 96+20% | 80 ×2 |
| L2 Cache | 24 MB+10809% | 0.22 MB |
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 GeForce GTX 295 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.The GeForce RTX 4060 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The GeForce GTX 295 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 3.5 | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | DLSS 3.0 (Native) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | Yes (DLSS 3.5) | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce RTX 4060 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 295 has 2 GB. The GeForce RTX 4060 offers 357.1% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 24 MB (GeForce RTX 4060) vs 0.22 MB (GeForce GTX 295) — the GeForce RTX 4060 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+357% | 1.75 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 272 GB/s | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 24 MB+10809% | 0.22 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 4060) vs 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce GTX 295). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate+8% | 11.1 (10_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6+39% | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 4+100% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 8th gen (GeForce RTX 4060) vs PureVideo HD VP2 (GeForce GTX 295). Decoder: NVDEC 5th gen vs PureVideo HD VP2. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,AV1 (GeForce RTX 4060) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 295).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 8th gen | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 5th gen | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,AV1 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 4060 draws 115W versus the GeForce GTX 295's 289W — a 86.1% difference. The GeForce RTX 4060 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 550W (GeForce RTX 4060) vs 680W (GeForce GTX 295). Power connectors: 8-pin vs 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin. Card length: 240mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 73°C vs 95°C.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 115W-60% | 289W |
| Recommended PSU | 550W-19% | 680W |
| Power Connector | 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Length | 240mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 73°C-23% | 95°C |
| Perf/Watt | 170.0+4046% | 4.1 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 4060 launched at $299 MSRP and currently averages $299, while the GeForce GTX 295 launched at $499 and now averages $50. The GeForce GTX 295 costs 83.3% less ($249 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 65.4 (GeForce RTX 4060) vs 24.0 (GeForce GTX 295) — the GeForce RTX 4060 offers 172.5% better value. The GeForce RTX 4060 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2009).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $299-40% | $499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $299 | $50-83% |
| Performance per Dollar | 65.4+173% | 24.0 |
| Codename | AD107 | GT200B |
| Release | May 18 2023 | January 8 2009 |
| Ranking | #84 | #816 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce RTX 4060 and GeForce GTX 295
