GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) VS Radeon RX 6800
We are comparing the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) (NVIDIA) with the Radeon RX 6800 (AMD). Scroll down to the pros and cons of each graphics card, in-depth specs, and gaming benchmarks.
Last Updated: November 2, 2026
Overall Comparison
KEY DIFFERENCES OF GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) AND Radeon RX 6800
Here’s how GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) and Radeon RX 6800 stack up against each other in their most impactful areas.
Reasons to consider the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB)
-
20% higher Boost Clock (2535 MHz vs 2105 MHz)
-
3% higher PassMark G3D Mark score (22690 vs 22020)
-
104% higher Blender score (3845 vs 1888)
-
12% higher PassMark GPU Compute score (12042 vs 10775)
-
36% higher FP32 Compute (22.06 TFLOPS vs 16.17 TFLOPS)
Reasons to consider the Radeon RX 6800
-
12% higher 4K Ultra FPS (55 vs 49)
-
12% higher 1440p Ultra FPS (95 vs 85)
-
11% higher 1080p Ultra FPS (129 vs 116)
-
20% higher 3DMark Time Spy score (16214 vs 13463)
-
78% more memory bandwidth (512 GB/s vs 288 GB/s)
SPECIFICATION TABLE COMPARISON OF GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) AND Radeon RX 6800
Below is the detailed specification table comparing GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) and Radeon RX 6800.
Note: Highlighted specs mean that GPU wins that spec row.
If neither side is highlighted, it is a tie or there is not enough data for both specs.
| Specification | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) | Radeon RX 6800 |
|---|---|---|
|
General Info
|
||
| GPU Name: | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) | Radeon RX 6800 |
| GPU Type: | Discrete | Discrete |
| Codename: | AD106 | Navi 21 |
| Vendor: | NVIDIA | AMD |
| Foundry: | TSMC | TSMC |
| Architecture: | Ada Lovelace | RDNA 2.0 |
| Generation: | GeForce 40 | Navi II |
| Release Date: | July 18, 2023 | October 28, 2020 |
|
Board Design
|
||
| Bus Interface: | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| PCIe Version: | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| PCIe Lanes: | x8 | x16 |
| Process Size: | 5 nm | 7 nm |
| Transistors: | 22.9 billion | 26.8 billion |
| Density: | 121.8 MTr/mm² | 51.5 MTr/mm² |
| Die Size: | 188 mm² | 520 mm² |
| Board Length: | 240 mm | 267 mm |
| Board Width: | 40 mm | 40 mm |
| Board Height: | 111 mm | 120 mm |
| Total Graphics Power (TGP): | 165 W | 250 W |
|
Graphics Processor
|
||
| Compute Units: | 34 | 60 |
| Shading Units: | 4352 | 3840 |
| Texture Mapping Units (TMUs): | 136 | 240 |
| Render Output Units (ROPs): | 48 | 96 |
| Tensor Cores: | 136 | — |
| Ray Tracing Cores: | 34 | 60 |
| Base Clock: | 2310 MHz | 1700 MHz |
| Boost Clock: | 2535 MHz | 2105 MHz |
| L1 Cache: | 128 KB per SM | 128 KB per Array |
| L2 Cache: | 32 MB | 4 MB |
| L3 Cache: | — | 128 MB |
|
Raw Performance
|
||
| Pixel Fill Rate: | 121.7 GPixel/s | 202.1 GPixel/s |
| Texture Fill Rate: | 344.8 GTexel/s | 505.2 GTexel/s |
| FP32 Performance: | 22.06 TFLOPs | 16.17 TFLOPs |
|
Memory
|
||
| Memory Type: | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Size: | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory Bus Width: | 128-bit | 256-bit |
| Memory Clock: | 2250 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Effective Memory Speed: | 18000 Mbps | 16000 Mbps |
| Bandwidth: | 288.0 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |
|
APIs
|
||
| DirectX: | 12.2 | 12.2 |
| Vulkan: | 1.3 | 1.4 |
| OpenGL: | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL: | 3.0 | 2.1 |
| CUDA: | 8.9 | — |
| Ray Tracing: | Yes | Yes |
| DLSS: | DLSS 3 | — |
| FSR: | — | FSR |
| DisplayPort: | 1.4a | 1.4a |
| HDMI: | 2.1 | 2.1 |
|
Gaming FPS
|
||
| 1080p Ultra (FPS): | 116 | 129 |
| 1440p Ultra (FPS): | 85 | 95 |
| 4K Ultra (FPS): | 49 | 55 |
|
Benchmarks
|
||
|
3D Mark
|
||
| Steel Nomad Lite | 13560 | 14554 |
| Time Spy | 13463 | 16214 |
| Solar Bay | 62357 | 64675 |
| Port Royal | 8119 | 8129 |
| Fire Strike | 34262 | 44369 |
| Wild Life Extreme | 25613 | 29737 |
| Night Raid | 136242 | 142530 |
|
GeekBench 6 OpenCL
|
||
| Compute Score | 135837 | 135060 |
| Background Blur | 232.6 | 298.6 |
| Face Detection | 138.4 | 186.2 |
| Horizon Detection | 4.68 | 4.75 |
| Edge Detection | 6.06 | 6.68 |
| Gaussian Blur | 6.99 | 5.58 |
| Feature Matching | 1.6 | 1.16 |
| Stereo Matching | 652.6 | 579 |
| Particle Physics | 19534.7 | 18755.1 |
|
Passmark Graphics
|
||
| G3D Mark | 22690 | 22020 |
| G2D Mark | 1081 | 996 |
| DirectX 11 | 200 | 212 |
| DirectX 12 | 90 | 89 |
| GPU Compute | 12042 | 10775 |
|
GFXBench 5
|
||
| Aztec Ruins High (4K) | 119.70 | 219.60 |
| Aztec Ruins Normal | 725.20 | 1131.00 |
| Car Chase | 620.40 | 1005.00 |
| Manhattan 3.1.1 (1440p) | 494.40 | 857.20 |
| T-Rex | 2727.20 | 3344.50 |
| Tessellation | 3381.90 | 2950.40 |
| ALU 2 | 3343.90 | 5114.60 |
| Driver Overhead 2 | 272.90 | 300.10 |
| API | OpenGL | OpenGL |
| OS | Windows | Windows |
|
Blender (Rendering)
|
||
| Blender Score | 3845 | 1888 |
|
GeekBench 6 ML
|
||
| Single Precision | — | 25097 |
| Half Precision | — | 27988 |
| Quantized | — | 19116 |
| Image Classification | — | 11245 |
| Image Segmentation | — | 13617 |
| Image Super Resolution | — | 27747 |
| Face Detection | — | 38124 |
| Pose Estimation | — | 119493 |
| Text Classification | — | 2425 |
| Machine Translation | — | 5228 |
| Object Detection | — | 11986 |
| Depth Estimation | — | 46083 |
| Style Transfer | — | 281860 |
| Framework | — | ONNX |
| Backend | — | DirectML |
|
FurMark
|
||
| 1080p Vulkan | 10569 | 10943 |
| 1440p Vulkan | 7268 | 7598 |
| 2160p Vulkan | 2451 | 4055 |
| 1080p OpenGL | 10099 | 11926 |
| 1440p OpenGL | 7275 | 8292 |
| 2160p OpenGL | 2784 | 4416 |
Tip: ▲ indicates a higher-is-better spec advantage, while ▼ indicates a lower-is-better advantage.
PERFORMANCE CHART COMPARISON OF GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) AND Radeon RX 6800
The charts below visualize how GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) and Radeon RX 6800 stack up in key performance metrics.
Radar Chart Comparison
Bullet Chart Comparison
Value For Money Calculator
Prices use available launch or current data. Enter your own prices to see which GPU gives better value.
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB)
Radeon RX 6800
Calculating...
Domain Score Summary
Scores are generated by Comparigon's scoring algorithm and are intended as a high-level guide. They may not map 1-to-1 with the individual spec-by-spec comparisons shown in the table.
Our Verdict
In conclusion, the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) has a narrow overall lead compared to the Radeon RX 6800. Its strongest advantages are in Hardware Architecture, Workstation and Energy Efficiency. The Radeon RX 6800 is the better fit if your top priority is Gaming Performance and AI & Machine Learning.
Try to Compare Again One of These GPUs With Another GPU
Pick which GPU to keep, then search for the other GPU to compare.
Frequently Asked Questions about GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) vs Radeon RX 6800
Radeon RX 6800 scores 20.4% higher than GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) in 3DMark Time Spy (16,214 vs 13,463).
Radeon RX 6800 scores 0.1% higher than GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) in 3DMark Port Royal (8,129 vs 8,119).
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) scores 0.6% higher than Radeon RX 6800 in Geekbench 6 OpenCL (135,837 vs 135,060).
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) and Radeon RX 6800 have the same listed graphics memory capacity (16 GB vs 16 GB).
Radeon RX 6800 has 77.8% higher memory bandwidth than GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) (512.0 GB/s vs 288.0 GB/s).
Both list GDDR6 for memory type.
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) lists 165 W for graphics power, while Radeon RX 6800 lists 250 W for graphics power.
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) scores 103.7% higher than Radeon RX 6800 in Blender (3,845 vs 1,888).
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) lists PCIe 4.0 x8 for bus interface, while Radeon RX 6800 lists PCIe 4.0 x16 for bus interface.
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) was released on July 18, 2023. Radeon RX 6800 was released on October 28, 2020. GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16GB) was released 993 days after Radeon RX 6800.
Disclaimer: Specs, pricing, and benchmarks are sourced from official manufacturer data and verified test results. While we strive for precision, product details and pricing may change. Comparigon may earn an affiliate commission on qualifying purchases.