
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB
Popular choices:

Radeon RX 7700
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB
2023Why buy it
- ✅29.8% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Access to DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution (2023).
- ✅Draws 165W instead of 190W, a 25W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌11.1% HIGHER MSRP$499 MSRPvs$449 MSRP
Radeon RX 7700
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $50 less on MSRP ($449 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on FSR 3 (2023) instead.
- ❌15.2% higher power demand at 190W vs 165W.
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB
2023Radeon RX 7700
2023Why buy it
- ✅29.8% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Access to DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution (2023).
- ✅Draws 165W instead of 190W, a 25W reduction.
Why buy it
- ✅Costs $50 less on MSRP ($449 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌11.1% HIGHER MSRP$499 MSRPvs$449 MSRP
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on FSR 3 (2023) instead.
- ❌15.2% higher power demand at 190W vs 165W.
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB better than Radeon RX 7700?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Radeon RX 7700 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
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 9800X3D 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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB | Radeon RX 7700 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 223 FPS | 210 FPS |
| medium | 208 FPS | 192 FPS |
| high | 182 FPS | 169 FPS |
| ultra | 168 FPS | 153 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 197 FPS | 192 FPS |
| medium | 166 FPS | 160 FPS |
| high | 137 FPS | 134 FPS |
| ultra | 131 FPS | 125 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 138 FPS | 125 FPS |
| medium | 115 FPS | 104 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 82 FPS |
| ultra | 87 FPS | 75 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB | Radeon RX 7700 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 433 FPS | 374 FPS |
| medium | 366 FPS | 319 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 249 FPS |
| ultra | 241 FPS | 198 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 279 FPS | 229 FPS |
| medium | 239 FPS | 197 FPS |
| high | 195 FPS | 156 FPS |
| ultra | 162 FPS | 126 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 123 FPS | 106 FPS |
| medium | 102 FPS | 89 FPS |
| high | 84 FPS | 73 FPS |
| ultra | 66 FPS | 56 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB | Radeon RX 7700 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 888 FPS | 838 FPS |
| medium | 716 FPS | 684 FPS |
| high | 628 FPS | 600 FPS |
| ultra | 511 FPS | 498 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 676 FPS | 643 FPS |
| medium | 537 FPS | 520 FPS |
| high | 460 FPS | 443 FPS |
| ultra | 383 FPS | 374 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 441 FPS |
| medium | 363 FPS | 355 FPS |
| high | 312 FPS | 298 FPS |
| ultra | 256 FPS | 240 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB | Radeon RX 7700 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 775 FPS | 602 FPS |
| medium | 639 FPS | 514 FPS |
| high | 558 FPS | 441 FPS |
| ultra | 492 FPS | 352 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 613 FPS | 465 FPS |
| medium | 503 FPS | 394 FPS |
| high | 435 FPS | 320 FPS |
| ultra | 378 FPS | 258 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 375 FPS | 291 FPS |
| medium | 322 FPS | 268 FPS |
| high | 298 FPS | 232 FPS |
| ultra | 256 FPS | 189 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB and Radeon RX 7700

GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB
The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 18 2023. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 2310 MHz to 2535 MHz. It has 4352 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 165W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 34 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 22,713 points. Launch price was $499.

Radeon RX 7700
Radeon RX 7700
The Radeon RX 7700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 4 2023. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1500 MHz to 2600 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 190W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 32 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 22,146 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB scores 22,713 and the Radeon RX 7700 reaches 22,146 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB is built on Ada Lovelace while the Radeon RX 7700 uses RDNA 3.0, both on 5 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 4,352 (GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB) vs 2,048 (Radeon RX 7700). Raw compute: 22.06 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB) vs 20.48 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 7700). Boost clocks: 2535 MHz vs 2600 MHz. Ray tracing: 34 RT cores (GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB) vs 32 (Radeon RX 7700) with 136 Tensor cores.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB | Radeon RX 7700 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 22,713+3% | 22,146 |
| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | RDNA 3.0 |
| Process Node | 5 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 4352+113% | 2048 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 22.06 TFLOPS+8% | 20.48 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2535 MHz | 2600 MHz+3% |
| ROPs | 48 | 64+33% |
| TMUs | 136+6% | 128 |
| L1 Cache | 4.3 MB+760% | 0.5 MB |
| L2 Cache | 32 MB+1500% | 2 MB |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 34+6% | 32 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
Both GPUs support Frame Generation technologies, but they achieve it differently. The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB uses DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation, while the Radeon RX 7700 relies on FSR Frame Generation + AFMF. Both can significantly boost FPS in supported titles, but they are not on the same feature stack.The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon RX 7700 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB | Radeon RX 7700 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution | FSR 3 |
| Frame Generation | DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation | FSR Frame Generation + AFMF |
| Ray Reconstruction | Yes (DLSS 3.5) | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 16 GB of GDDR6. Memory bandwidth: 288 GB/s (GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB) vs 624 GB/s (Radeon RX 7700) — a 116.7% advantage for the Radeon RX 7700. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 32 MB (GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB) vs 2 MB (Radeon RX 7700) — the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB | Radeon RX 7700 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 288 GB/s | 624 GB/s+117% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 32 MB+1500% | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB) vs 12.2 (Radeon RX 7700). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB | Radeon RX 7700 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12.2+2% |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 8th gen (GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB) vs VCN 4.0 (Radeon RX 7700). Decoder: NVDEC 5th gen vs VCN 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,AV1 (GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Radeon RX 7700).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB | Radeon RX 7700 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 8th gen | VCN 4.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 5th gen | VCN 4.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,AV1 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB draws 165W versus the Radeon RX 7700's 190W — a 14.1% difference. The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 550W (GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB) vs 650W (Radeon RX 7700). Power connectors: 16-pin (12VHPWR) vs 2x 8-pin. Card length: 240mm vs 240mm, occupying 2.2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 65°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB | Radeon RX 7700 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 165W-13% | 190W |
| Recommended PSU | 550W-15% | 650W |
| Power Connector | 16-pin (12VHPWR) | 2x 8-pin |
| Length | 240mm | 240mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2.2 | 2-9% |
| Temp (Load) | 65°C-13% | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 137.7+18% | 116.6 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB launched at $499 MSRP, while the Radeon RX 7700 launched at $449. The Radeon RX 7700 costs 10% less ($50 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 45.5 (GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB) vs 49.3 (Radeon RX 7700) — the Radeon RX 7700 offers 8.4% better value.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB | Radeon RX 7700 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $499 | $449-10% |
| Performance per Dollar | 45.5 | 49.3+8% |
| Codename | AD106 | Navi 33 |
| Release | May 18 2023 | January 4 2023 |
| Ranking | #56 | #140 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












