Component comparison
GeForce RTX 4060 vs GeForce MX450
GeForce RTX 4060 vs GeForce MX450 — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce RTX 4060
- + Release year (+3)
- + VRAM (GB) (+6 GB)
- + Memory clock (MHz) (+750 MHz)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+192 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+64 bit)
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+90 W)
- + Lithography (nm) (-7 nm)
- + Transistors (M) (+14,200M)
- + Die size (mm²) (+41 mm²)
- + CUDA cores (+2176)
- + TMUs (+32)
- + ROPs (+16)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+11.88 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+67.70 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+148.00 GTexel/s)
- + Energy efficiency (+0.5)
- + PassMark (overall) (+13641)
- + 3DMark Time Spy (+8429)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+21805)
- + Geekbench OpenCL (+73113)
- + Geekbench Vulkan (+72677)
- + Normalized score (+31.2)
B
GeForce MX450
Components are close in specs
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce RTX 4060
|
Component B
GeForce MX450
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2023 (+3) | 2020 |
| VRAM (GB) | 8 GB (+6 GB) | 2 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5, GDDR6 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 2000 MHz (+750 MHz) | 1250 MHz |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 272 GB/s (+192 GB/s) | 80 GB/s |
| Memory bus (bit) | 128 bit (+64 bit) | 64 bit |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 115 W (+90 W) | 25 W |
| Lithography (nm) | 5 nm (-7 nm) | 12 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 18,900M (+14,200M) | 4,700M |
| Die size (mm²) | 159 mm² (+41 mm²) | 200 mm² |
| Base clock (MHz) | — | 1395 MHz |
| Boost clock (MHz) | — | 1575 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 3,072 (+2176) | 896 |
| TMUs | 96 (+32) | 64 |
| ROPs | 48 (+16) | 32 |
| RT cores | 24 | — |
| Tensor cores | 96 | — |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 15.11 TFLOPS (+11.88 TFLOPS) | 3.23 TFLOPS |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 118.10 GPixel/s (+67.70 GPixel/s) | 50.40 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 236.20 GTexel/s (+148.00 GTexel/s) | 88.20 GTexel/s |
| Energy efficiency | 28.0 (+0.5) | 27.6 |
| PassMark (overall) | 17,355 (+13641) | 3,714 |
| 3DMark Time Spy | 10,329 (+8429) | 1,900 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 26,530 (+21805) | 4,725 |
| Geekbench OpenCL | 101,654 (+73113) | 28,541 |
| Geekbench Vulkan | 99,998 (+72677) | 27,321 |
| Normalized score | 75.9 (+31.2) | 44.7 |
Only in component A
DLSS
ReBAR
ray_tracing
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce RTX 4060 | GeForce MX450 | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battlefield 5 | 130 FPS | 49 FPS | +165.3% (A) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 195 FPS | 88 FPS | +121.6% (A) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 123 FPS | 32 FPS | +284.4% (A) |
| Dota 2 | 164 FPS | 88 FPS | +86.4% (A) |
| Far Cry 5 | 128 FPS | 34 FPS | +276.5% (A) |
| Fortnite | 180 FPS | 61 FPS | +195.1% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 160 FPS | 35 FPS | +357.1% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 238 FPS | 34 FPS | +600% (A) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Metro Exodus | 25 FPS | 10 FPS | +150% (A) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 124 FPS | 16 FPS | +675% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 191 FPS | 33 FPS | +478.8% (A) |
| Valorant | 240 FPS | 85 FPS | +182.4% (A) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 4060 wins 22 of the comparable criteria.
The choice depends on your use case.
🤔 How to choose
Universal advice for any use case.
- Reliability vs price: reliability (median 50) ↔ price (median 385.1).
- Weight vs CPU: mobility (median 48) ↔ overall performance (median 49.8).
- Upgradeability vs battery: upgradability (median 50) ↔ battery life (median 2.8).