GeForce RTX 4060 Ti vs Radeon R5 (Carrizo)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R5 (Carrizo) with GeForce RTX 4060 Ti, including specs and performance data.
RTX 4060 Ti outperforms R5 (Carrizo) by a whopping 3104% 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 | 966 | 55 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 25 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 79.77 |
| Power efficiency | 3.68 | 25.82 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016) | Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) |
| GPU code name | Carrizo | AD106 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 4 June 2015 (10 years ago) | 18 May 2023 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $399 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 256 | 4352 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 2310 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 800 MHz | 2535 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2410 Million | 22,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12-35 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 |
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).
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| 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 | 64/128 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 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 | 6.7 |
| 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.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−2900%
|
60−65
+2900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
| God of War | 6−7
−3067%
|
190−200
+3067%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−2900%
|
120−130
+2900%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−2900%
|
60−65
+2900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−2900%
|
120−130
+2900%
|
| Fortnite | 7−8
−3043%
|
220−230
+3043%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−2900%
|
300−310
+2900%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−2900%
|
60−65
+2900%
|
| God of War | 6−7
−3067%
|
190−200
+3067%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−2900%
|
300−310
+2900%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−3094%
|
1150−1200
+3094%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−2900%
|
120−130
+2900%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−2900%
|
60−65
+2900%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
−3094%
|
1150−1200
+3094%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
| Dota 2 | 20−22
−2900%
|
600−650
+2900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−2900%
|
120−130
+2900%
|
| Fortnite | 7−8
−3043%
|
220−230
+3043%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−2900%
|
300−310
+2900%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−2900%
|
60−65
+2900%
|
| God of War | 6−7
−3067%
|
190−200
+3067%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−2900%
|
300−310
+2900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−3025%
|
250−260
+3025%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−3094%
|
1150−1200
+3094%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−2900%
|
120−130
+2900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
| Dota 2 | 20−22
−2900%
|
600−650
+2900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−2900%
|
120−130
+2900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−2900%
|
300−310
+2900%
|
| God of War | 6−7
−3067%
|
190−200
+3067%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−2900%
|
300−310
+2900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−3025%
|
250−260
+3025%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−3094%
|
1150−1200
+3094%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 7−8
−3043%
|
220−230
+3043%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−2900%
|
120−130
+2900%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−2817%
|
350−400
+2817%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
−2841%
|
500−550
+2841%
|
| Valorant | 10−12
−3082%
|
350−400
+3082%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2900%
|
30−33
+2900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−2900%
|
60−65
+2900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−2900%
|
120−130
+2900%
|
| God of War | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−2900%
|
30−33
+2900%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−2900%
|
450−500
+2900%
|
| Valorant | 9−10
−3011%
|
280−290
+3011%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| God of War | 1−2
−2900%
|
30−33
+2900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.69 | 54.15 |
| Recency | 4 June 2015 | 18 May 2023 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 160 Watt |
R5 (Carrizo) has 1233.3% lower power consumption.
RTX 4060 Ti, on the other hand, has a 3104.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 (Carrizo) in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R5 (Carrizo) 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.
