Is it worth spending more money to get an RTX 4060 gaming laptop over a cheaper RTX
4050?
I’ve compared both of these GPUs in 25 games at 1080p and 1440p resolutions to find out!
Both GPUs are using the AD107 die, but the higher tier RTX 4060 laptop GPU has 20% more
CUDA, tensor and ray tracing cores compared to the lower tier RTX 4050.
The 4060 also has 33% more GDDR6 memory capacity, as well as a larger memory bus with more memory
bandwidth.
Both GPUs max out with the same boost clock speed at 115 watts, but they can also run
as low as 35 watts in thinner or cheaper designs.
Both of these laptops can run their GPUs up to 115 watts, plus an extra 25 with Nvidia’s
dynamic boost, so 140 in total.
So we’re comparing a full powered RTX 4050 against a full powered RTX 4060.
More power equals more performance, up until a point.
This graph shows the 3DMark Time Spy graphics score from each GPU at different power levels.
With the same power limit, the 4060 was always outperforming the 4050, as expected, but both
of them started flatlining at around 90 watts for the 4050, and 100 watts for the 4060.
This seems to be normal for these GPUs because a voltage limit gets hit, but I’ve covered
that in a dedicated video which I’ll link below this one for later.
I’m using XMG’s Focus 16 laptop to do this testing, so we’ve got the exact same
CPU, RAM, SSD and cooling for a perfectly fair comparison.
They’ve both got the same sized batteries too, and with an actual game running there
wasn’t really that much difference between them with both limited to 30 FPS.
The RTX 4060 laptop was running warmer in Cyberpunk 2077 at 1440p ultra settings.
Nvidia’s thermal throttle limit is 87 degrees Celsius, so we’re close, but the actual
limit on both laptops was the voltage limit.
This is why the 4060 was running close to 110 watts while the 4050 was around 94 watts,
despite on paper both being 115 to 140 watt GPUs.
The 4050 ends up reaching a higher clock speed in this game, but it does have fewer CUDA
cores to power.
The 4060 laptop was using a little more power when measured at the wall though, just 9%
extra.
Despite using more power, the 4060 also delivers more performance, meaning the 4060 ends up
more power efficient from a performance per watt perspective.
To be fair, Cyberpunk did have one of the biggest FPS differences out of all 25 games
tested though, but even in a different game with a more average result, the 4060 still
ends up more power efficient.
Let’s move into actual game FPS now, starting out with Cyberpunk 2077.
I’ve got the 1080p results down the bottom and 1440p up the top, with the RTX 4050 below
the RTX 4060.
At 1080p the 4060 had a below average lead at 19% faster than the 4050, but at 1440p
the 4060 had the biggest lead over the 4050 out of all 25 games tested.
The 4060 was reaching a 60% higher average FPS, a big difference made possible by its
extra VRAM.
I’ve also tested this game with the ray tracing ultra preset, which is a heavier workload,
so I’ve also enabled DLSS on balanced mode too.
There’s now a much bigger difference, with the 4060 reaching 107% higher average FPS
at 1080p, and 115% higher FPS at 1440p - more than double!
This game also has DLSS 3 frame generation support, but even with this on with the 4050,
the 4060 could still beat it without even using it, of course assuming it's even fair
to compare generated frames.
Forza Horizon 5 is another game where the 4060’s extra VRAM makes a big difference.
At 1440p the 4060 was also reaching a 60% higher average frame rate, just like the last
game.
Unlike the last game, a similar gap was also seen at 1080p, at least with the extreme setting
preset.
It’s likely the gap would be smaller at lower setting levels, but I’ve tested with
higher GPU intensive settings, because, well, this is a GPU comparison.
I’ve also tested The Witcher 3 with its next gen update and the ray tracing preset
enabled.
I think this game is bugged at 1440p or something, because even higher tier GPUs all max out
at 30 FPS without upscaling features like DLSS.
The 4060 was otherwise just 19% faster than the 4050 at 1080p.
This game has DLSS and frame gen support, which can be used to both increase smoothness.
Ray tracing at 1440p was unusable on both GPUs without these features.
The 4050 still wasn’t amazing even with DLSS and frame gen, but I definitely found
the 4060 usable.
Hogwarts Legacy was tested in Hogsmeade, but there was a problem.
Textures were popping in and out during my test on both laptops, but much more so on
the RTX 4050 laptop, as it’s limited to 6 gigs of VRAM.
It still happened on the 4060, but it was way less frequent, so although the 4060 was
only 16% faster in average FPS, technically this isn’t a fair comparison because visual
quality suffered more on the 4050.
This is another game with DLSS and frame generation support.
I didn’t find these features to help with the texture issues, but it did result in smoother
gameplay and I would definitely recommend using both with an RTX 40 series laptop.
Regardless of what you think about fake frames, once you’ve tried it for yourself I bet
you’ll be leaving it on.
Microsoft Flight Simulator had a below average difference, with the 4060 reaching a 19% higher
average FPS at both resolutions.
Enabling DLSS didn’t help the 4050 at 1440p very much, boosting average FPS by just 3,
but frame generation was able to smooth things out.
This is another game where additional latency honestly isn’t a concern, so might as well
take advantage of frame gen if you’ve got it.
And just to be clear, it’s not strictly fair to compare generated frames like this
as we’re not comparing visuals apples to apples, I just don’t have a better way of
representing the improvement without saying it feels smoother for the fifth time.
A Plague Tale Requiem was similar, 20% faster on the RTX 4060 laptop at both resolutions,
but then both laptops are able to get a boost with standard DLSS on balanced mode.
Again frame generation is able to help here, and it did provide a noticeable improvement
during my test, making both laptops feel smoother.
Apex Legends had one of the smaller differences out of the 25 games tested, just 16% faster
with the 4060 at both resolutions, and same deal in Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 at 1440p
as well.
Right on 60 FPS for the 4060 at 1440p max settings, but the 4050 was only like 8 FPS
behind.
Alright after 8 games I think you’ve got the general idea.
We’ll just skip through the rest of the 17 games tested on screen now rather than
waste your time having me talk through every single one, so feel free to pause the video
if you want a closer look at any of the results.
I think it’s important to test a wide selection of games so that we can get an accurate picture
of the average performance differences to make the fairest possible conclusion.
As I always say, more data equals more better.
Let’s look at those average differences next.
On average over all 25 games tested, at 1080p the higher tier RTX 4060 laptop GPU was 21%
faster compared to the lower tier RTX 4050 laptop GPU.
This graph shows how much faster each game was on the 4060.
Games like Watch Dogs Legion and Forza 5 benefit from more VRAM, even at 1080p, which explains
why they were so much faster with the 4060, as it’s got 33% more VRAM.
For the most part though, the 4060 has 20% more CUDA cores than the 4050, so not too
surprising to see that it’s around this much better in games too.
If we step up to the higher 1440p resolution where we’re more GPU bound, the RTX 4060
now had a slightly higher 24% lead compared to the 4050.
Honestly, I wouldn’t be picking a 4050 laptop if 1440p gaming is the goal.
Don’t get me wrong, the 4050 can definitely run many games at 1440p well enough, especially
if you’re happy with lower settings or using upscaling features like DLSS and FSR, but
the extra VRAM available to the 4060 starts making more of a difference here than it did
at 1080p.
And this is only going to continue into the future with newer games.
Here’s how frame rates look if we instead take the average of all 25 games.
I think this better allows us to visually see the overall differences as a quick summary.
At 1440p the 4050 was averaging close to 60 FPS without upscaling methods, and don’t
forget I’ve tested with higher settings here to load up the GPUs, but it’s like
I said, the 4050 can certainly play many games well enough at 1440p today, but it’s difficult
to recommend going into the future with 6 gigs of VRAM.
So the 4060 performs better in all games, surprising no one, but how much more money
does it cost, and is it worth paying more for compared to the 4050?
Pricing and availability will change over time, so check out those links below the video
for updates and sales.
And if any 4050 or 4060 laptops do go on sale, we’ll be sure to add them to our gaminglaptop.deals
website, so check that out to get the best deal on your next gaming laptop!
We update it every day with all of the latest sales.
At the time of recording, the XMG Focus 16 that I’ve tested with here starts for 1649
Euro for the i9-13900HX and RTX 4050 configuration, while the higher tier RTX 4060 configuration
costs 158 Euro extra, or about 10% more money.
In this specific case, the RTX 4060 laptop ends up providing better value from a cost
per frame perspective.
The 4060 performs 21% faster than the 4050 at 1080p, but it’s only 10% more money to
get the 4060, so not a bad deal if you can afford it, especially for the extra VRAM which
will likely be more beneficial in future games.
On the other hand, with a sale it’s possible to get a full powered 4050 laptop for $950
USD, granted with a worse screen and lower tier CPU.
The cheapest full powered 4060 I can see is more than $400 more expensive, but if we instead
plug these numbers in, and assume both laptops provide similar FPS results, the 4050 ends
up offering better value because there’s a bigger price difference.
The point is it’s really going to depend on the specific laptops you’re picking between.
Honestly, the difference was smaller than I expected.
When I previously compared an RTX 3050 Ti against an RTX 3060, the 3060 was like 50%
faster on average.
So it was just much easier to recommend when it was often like a couple of hundred dollars
more expensive.
There was a bigger performance gap.
But now there’s an even smaller performance gap between the 4050 and 4060, so ideally
we’re going to need an even smaller price gap for the 4060 to be worthwhile.
Of course, that said, I do think that the 4060 should be heavily considered for the
future due to that extra VRAM - of course if you can afford it.
But in most games today, the 4050 was doing quite well at 1080p.
The 4050 would also get more life once you consider upscaling technologies like DLSS
or FSR.
Plus it’s also got frame generation support which will help smooth out supported games.
But of course the 4060 has these features too.
My point is they can be used to extend the lifespan of the 4050.
If you’re not so much interested in those newer features like frame generation, then
the 3060 from last gen still does quite well, and it’s often available for less money
than even the RTX 4050.
But is it still worth buying in 2023?
Check out these comparisons next where I’ve compared the 4050 against the 3060 and the
4060 against the 3060.
I’ve compared the same 25 games at 1080p and 1440p, so I’ll see you in one of those
next!