lexluthermiesterLet's review....
(BTW, you got that wording wrong)

Hmm. Interesting opinion. Opinion, not fact, but let's move on...

This statement shows several things. First it shows that you have not been paying attention to game advances for the last 3 years. Second, it shows that you have not been paying attention to the reviews done ALL OVER the internet. Third, Assuming TPU staff where getting things wrong somehow, most of the rest of the reviewers on the internet are ALSO getting the very same things wrong.

Now either EVERYONE ELSE on the planet are getting something wrong and you & a few other people are right(possible), or you and the people who think like you are missing something very important.

Which do you think is more likely? Hmm?


You were saying?

It's buried a few pages back now but I sold my 6GB card in March 2020 because the third game I'd played that couldn't run max settings on 6GB came along and I'd had enough of running out of VRAM and fettling with hundreds of permutations of different detail settings to try and get performance back to where it should have been.

Yes, 6GB is still enough to run games at reduced settings without any problems, but having more VRAM that you need is definitely better than having to work around a VRAM shortage, every time. I regret buying the vanilla 2060 because I wrongly believed that the Vega56's 8GB of VRAM wasn't necessary.

This was 6GB in 2019, and it shouldn't be that hard to apply the same logic to 2021 and 10GB, especially since the 10GB cards currently cost 3x more than the 2060 I bought with only 6GB.

VaderIn fairness to the 1060 3gb, most reviewers used either high or ultra graphics, while users would've opted for medium/low textures instead, and avoid tanking their fps.

Medium settings are fine for a $199 budget gaming card. Medium settings are not fine for a "$700+scalper tax" flagship.