GeForce RTX 5060 vs Radeon R4 (Kaveri)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R4 (Kaveri) with GeForce RTX 5060, including specs and performance data.
RTX 5060 outperforms R4 (Kaveri) by a whopping 2388% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1145 | 270 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 8.53 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.1 (2014) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | Kaveri | GB206 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 4 June 2014 (10 years ago) | March 2025 |
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 | 4608 |
| Core clock speed | 533 MHz | 2235 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2520 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2410 Million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 170 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 362.9 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 23.22 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 48 |
| TMUs | no data | 144 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 144 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 36 |
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 5.0 x16 |
| 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 | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64/128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 448.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
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 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.4 |
| CUDA | - | 10.1 |
| 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 | 8
−2275%
| 190−200
+2275%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
−1667%
|
50−55
+1667%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−429%
|
35−40
+429%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−2000%
|
40−45
+2000%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
−1667%
|
50−55
+1667%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−429%
|
35−40
+429%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−2000%
|
40−45
+2000%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−1500%
|
80−85
+1500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−838%
|
75−80
+838%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−387%
|
140−150
+387%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
−1667%
|
50−55
+1667%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−429%
|
35−40
+429%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 13
−1708%
|
230−240
+1708%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−2000%
|
40−45
+2000%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−2208%
|
300−310
+2208%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−1500%
|
80−85
+1500%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−4200%
|
40−45
+4200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−838%
|
75−80
+838%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−1040%
|
55−60
+1040%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−387%
|
140−150
+387%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−429%
|
35−40
+429%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−2000%
|
40−45
+2000%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−2208%
|
300−310
+2208%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−1500%
|
80−85
+1500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−838%
|
75−80
+838%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−1040%
|
55−60
+1040%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−387%
|
140−150
+387%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 21−24 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 4−5
−3475%
|
140−150
+3475%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
−3360%
|
170−180
+3360%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 18−20 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 45−50 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−1500%
|
30−35
+1500%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
−4500%
|
45−50
+4500%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
−1500%
|
16−18
+1500%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−140%
|
35−40
+140%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−2160%
|
110−120
+2160%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 8−9 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−2100%
|
21−24
+2100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−900%
|
20−22
+900%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−900%
|
20−22
+900%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Valorant | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
This is how R4 (Kaveri) and RTX 5060 compete in popular games:
- RTX 5060 is 2275% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1440p resolution and the Epic Preset, the RTX 5060 is 4500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 5060 is ahead in 35 tests (61%)
- there's a draw in 22 tests (39%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.83 | 20.65 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 5 nm |
RTX 5060 has a 2388% higher aggregate performance score, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 5060 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R4 (Kaveri) in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R4 (Kaveri) is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 5060 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.
