GeForce RTX 4060 Ti vs Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) with GeForce RTX 4060 Ti, including specs and performance data.
RTX 4060 Ti outperforms R4 (Stoney Ridge) by a whopping 5006% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1140 | 60 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 52 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 80.80 |
| Power efficiency | 5.44 | 26.05 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016) | Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) |
| GPU code name | Stoney Ridge | AD106 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 June 2016 (9 years ago) | 18 May 2023 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $399 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 192 | 4352 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 2310 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 600 MHz | 2535 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 22,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 160 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 344.8 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 22.06 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 48 |
| TMUs | no data | 136 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 136 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 34 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 4.3 MB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 32 MB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | no data | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Length | no data | 240 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 16-pin |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | no data | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 2250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 288.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (FL 12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.3 |
| CUDA | - | 8.9 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 9
−4900%
| 450−500
+4900%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 0.89 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−4900%
|
350−400
+4900%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−4900%
|
50−55
+4900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−4900%
|
450−500
+4900%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−4900%
|
1600−1650
+4900%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−4900%
|
1300−1350
+4900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−4900%
|
750−800
+4900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−4900%
|
350−400
+4900%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−4900%
|
50−55
+4900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−4900%
|
50−55
+4900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−4900%
|
450−500
+4900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−4900%
|
300−310
+4900%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−4900%
|
1600−1650
+4900%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−4900%
|
750−800
+4900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−4900%
|
350−400
+4900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−4900%
|
450−500
+4900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−4900%
|
300−310
+4900%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−4900%
|
1600−1650
+4900%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−4900%
|
200−210
+4900%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 7−8
−4900%
|
350−400
+4900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−4900%
|
550−600
+4900%
|
| Valorant | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−4900%
|
50−55
+4900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−4900%
|
150−160
+4900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−4900%
|
50−55
+4900%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−4900%
|
700−750
+4900%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−4900%
|
250−260
+4900%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−4900%
|
100−105
+4900%
|
This is how R4 (Stoney Ridge) and RTX 4060 Ti compete in popular games:
- RTX 4060 Ti is 4900% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.06 | 54.12 |
| Recency | 1 June 2016 | 18 May 2023 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 160 Watt |
R4 (Stoney Ridge) has 967% lower power consumption.
RTX 4060 Ti, on the other hand, has a 5006% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) is a notebook graphics card while GeForce RTX 4060 Ti is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
