Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB vs RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation with Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation
2023
20 GB GDDR6, 70 Watt
49.46
+2.3%
RX 9060 XT 16 GB
2025, $349
16 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
48.33

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation outperforms 9060 XT 16 GB by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking7177
Place by popularitynot in top-10032
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data83.34
Power efficiency54.7423.40
ArchitectureAda Lovelace (2022−2024)RDNA 4.0 (2025−2026)
GPU code nameAD104Navi 44
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date21 March 2023 (3 years ago)4 June 2025 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$349

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores61442048
Core clock speed720 MHz1700 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHz3130 MHz
Number of transistors35,800 million29,700 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)70 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate299.5400.6
Floating-point processing power19.17 TFLOPS25.64 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs192128
Tensor Cores192no data
Ray Tracing Cores4832
L0 Cacheno data512 KB
L1 Cache6 MBno data
L2 Cache48 MB4 MB
L3 Cacheno data32 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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 5.0 x16
Length168 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount20 GB16 GB
Memory bus width160 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz2518 MHz
Memory bandwidth280.0 GB/s322.3 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 Connectors4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.86.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.2
Vulkan1.31.3
CUDA8.9-
DLSS+-

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 49.46
+2.3%
RX 9060 XT 16 GB 48.33

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 20604
+2.3%
Samples: 245
RX 9060 XT 16 GB 20135
Samples: 9162

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 HD160−170
+1.9%
157
1440p70−75
+0%
70
4K40−4543
+7.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.22
1440pno data4.99
4Kno data8.12

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 150−160 150−160
Counter-Strike 2 250−260 250−260
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120 110−120
Resident Evil 4 Remake 130−140 130−140

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 150−160 150−160
Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Counter-Strike 2 250−260 250−260
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120 110−120
Far Cry 5 270 270
Fortnite 200−210 200−210
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 180−190
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 270−280 270−280

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 150−160 150−160
Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Counter-Strike 2 250−260 250−260
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120 110−120
Far Cry 5 248 248
Fortnite 200−210 200−210
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 180−190
Grand Theft Auto V 154 154
Metro Exodus 120−130 120−130
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 273 273
Valorant 270−280 270−280

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120 110−120
Far Cry 5 233 233
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 180−190
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 146 146

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 200−210 200−210

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 130−140 130−140
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 350−400 350−400
Grand Theft Auto V 83 83
Metro Exodus 75−80 75−80
Valorant 300−350 300−350

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65 60−65
Far Cry 5 160 160
Forza Horizon 4 140−150 140−150
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 102 102

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 130−140 130−140

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 60−65 60−65
Grand Theft Auto V 91 91
Metro Exodus 45−50 45−50
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 84 84
Valorant 290−300 290−300

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 80−85 80−85
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30 27−30
Far Cry 5 80 80
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 100−110
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80 75−80

4K
Epic

Fortnite 70−75 70−75

This is how RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation and RX 9060 XT 16 GB compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is 2% faster in 1080p
  • A tie in 1440p
  • RX 9060 XT 16 GB is 8% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 49.46 48.33
Recency 21 March 2023 4 June 2025
Maximum RAM amount 20 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 5 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 70 Watt 160 Watt

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a 2% higher aggregate performance score, a 25% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 56% lower power consumption.

RX 9060 XT 16 GB, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 20% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation and Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB.

Be aware that RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB 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.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.4 60 votes

Rate RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 2061 votes

Rate Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation or Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.