3060ti 8gb vs 3060 12gb

[Vario]

I've been in EVGA queue for both of these products for almost a year. The 3060 12GB is likely to come up first. I have a question regarding predicting which is more likely to have staying power ~4 years out from now. I tend to run stuff a really long time. The 3060ti processor is much faster but the 12GB ram is possibly better in this aspect if lower vram amounts end up being a limiting factor. What do you guys think?

The main reason I ask is in 2013, I once purchased a 770 2GB instead of the 4GB because I was told the card wasn't really fast enough to matter. After a few years, the limited VRAM became an issue that prevented me from running some games. Similarly, the 780ti's 3GB severely limited that card just a couple years after its launch, despite being close to a 980 in performance otherwise.

 

[droopyRO]

3060 Ti. GPU power is power. While vRAM can be managed by lowering texture details.

 

[Batou1986]

VRAM only matters if you have the GPU horsepower to use it, the only way your going to use 12gb of VRAM is at 4k or higher and the 3060 isn't fast enough at 4k for it to even be a consideration.
The only reason the 3060 has 12gb is due to the 192 bit buss design which basically limits it to either using 6gb or 12gb of VRAM and 6gb is likely too little for some modern games.
If you plan on keeping the card for a long time the faster GPU is going to matter much more than the extra VRAM

 

[Vario]

I agree with you guys, the ti was what I was leading with, I just didn't want to make the same mistake twice.
I should add I use 1440P, 165Hz, graphics not important, smooth frame rate is.

 

[ixi]

Well, I always go for stronger gpu chip than vram amount as I have never had problem with GB capacity what I'm playing.

 

[ppn]

The database here shows 3060 to be
3.0x faster than 770/2, and 6.0x Vram buffer amount,
2.5x faster than 780/3, 4.0x Vram
2.0x than 1060/6, rocking 2.0x vram

Of course I find 3060 to be much faster than 780 because the latter struggles with 720p60

3060 Ti on the other hand is
3.0x faster than 780/3, but only 2,666x Vram

SO not looking good for the 3060Ti. But what other choice do we have.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

At this point unless you come up in the queue in the next month or so I'd probably skip both and wait for the 4000 series that will likely have adequate vram. I personally wouldn't be shocked if none of the nvidia cards from the 3080 down age well due to nvidia cheaping out on vram.

If I had to choose one of these two it would be the ti though it's quite a bit faster but having to lower settings in a year or so for a 500+ gpu feels bad.

 

[neatfeatguy]

The 3060Ti will give you better performance at 1440p, hands down. The 3060 is a solid card for 1080 and can play 1440p with setting adjustments, but it still lags behind the Ti version by roughly 30%.

The one thing that really amazes me about the difference between the two cards is that that power draw of the 3060Ti is barely higher than the 3060. The 3060 draws so much power for the performance it provides. The Ti draws around 20W higher and provides upwards of 30% more performance over the 3060.

If you feel the 3060Ti will be something coming up soon, I'd just wait for that one. If you feel you absolutely need something sooner than later and just can't wait, the 3060 isn't a bad card, but just not an ideal one for your resolution.

On the other hand, I ran a 980Ti card (6GB VRAM) for nearly 6 years. It ran 5760x1080 for 5+ years and finally ran on the 1440p monitor for about 4-5 months until I got a new GPU. The card ran things well for that time frame and I was okay with dropping settings. 6GB did just fine. The 8GB on the 3060Ti or 12GB (which, honestly is wasted) on the 3060 will be fine for the next 3-5 years. It just all depends on if you're okay with lowering settings more with the 3060 over the Ti.

With the 4xxx series coming out sometime in the next year - according to rumors - waiting might mean you might not find a card from the 4xxx series either and you could be stuck with no upgrading at all. Weigh your pros and cons. Personally, I wouldn't pass up the chance for something now in hopes something better comes along. If you get something now and something better comes along, you could always upgrade and sell what you have now to recoup some of the cost.

 

[Vario]

The 3060Ti will give you better performance at 1440p, hands down. The 3060 is a solid card for 1080 and can play 1440p with setting adjustments, but it still lags behind the Ti version by roughly 30%.

The one thing that really amazes me about the difference between the two cards is that that power draw of the 3060Ti is barely higher than the 3060. The 3060 draws so much power for the performance it provides. The Ti draws around 20W higher and provides upwards of 30% more performance over the 3060.

If you feel the 3060Ti will be something coming up soon, I'd just wait for that one. If you feel you absolutely need something sooner than later and just can't wait, the 3060 isn't a bad card, but just not an ideal one for your resolution.

On the other hand, I ran a 980Ti card (6GB VRAM) for nearly 6 years. It ran 5760x1080 for 5+ years and finally ran on the 1440p monitor for about 4-5 months until I got a new GPU. The card ran things well for that time frame and I was okay with dropping settings. 6GB did just fine. The 8GB on the 3060Ti or 12GB (which, honestly is wasted) on the 3060 will be fine for the next 3-5 years. It just all depends on if you're okay with lowering settings more with the 3060 over the Ti.

With the 4xxx series coming out sometime in the next year - according to rumors - waiting might mean you might not find a card from the 4xxx series either and you could be stuck with no upgrading at all. Weigh your pros and cons. Personally, I wouldn't pass up the chance for something now in hopes something better comes along. If you get something now and something better comes along, you could always upgrade and sell what you have now to recoup some of the cost.

I was inclined to buy the 3060 when it comes up and then buy a 3060ti when it comes up and sell the 3060.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I was inclined to buy the 3060 when it comes up and then buy a 3060ti when it comes up and sell the 3060.

That's a great idea actually.

 

[pregep]

My vote goes for 3060Ti, what @droopyRO just said.

 

[Deleted member 202104]

I was inclined to buy the 3060 when it comes up and then buy a 3060ti when it comes up and sell the 3060.

This is exactly what I'd recommend.

 

[Metroid]

12gb, more future proof, 8gb is 2018, now anything more than or equal 10gb minimum but 8gb still not bad, 6gb is bad.

 

[neatfeatguy]

I was inclined to buy the 3060 when it comes up and then buy a 3060ti when it comes up and sell the 3060.

That's a route I'd look if I was in your shoes. If GPU prices stay like they are for some time, you should easily be able to come out ahead after selling the 3060. I look every now and then and "new" 3060 cards on ebay are selling upwards of $900 (I know, gag me with a spoon). Hopefully you'd basically be paying next to nothing (or actually making money) for the 3060Ti once you get it and sell the 3060.

 

[Keullo-e]

I'd go for 3060 Ti as well. Like said, 3060's raw power may not be enough to use all that VRAM.

 

[looniam]

I was inclined to buy the 3060 when it comes up and then buy a 3060ti when it comes up and sell the 3060.

that was my plan too but after getting a 3060 the drops for the Ti's are so few and far inbetween i left the queue. the 3069 isn't as bad as some think, i haven't had a problem getting any game at 1440 max settings and a few "slow paced" games (~35fps) at 4K.

i expect it to be about the same as the 980ti; great 1440 card that after a few years (4?) will be a 1080 card. but maybe i should have stuck it out for the 3060ti and worry about Vram later.

 

[Frick]

12gb, more future proof, 8gb is 2018, now anything more than or equal 10gb minimum but 8gb still not bad, 6gb is bad.

This isn't a hard rule though. I have the 3060ti and tried Horizon Zero Dawn @ 4K Ultra (maybe some tweaking of settings was involved, don't remember) and it worked quite well.

 

[Keullo-e]

This isn't a hard rule though. I have the 3060ti and tried Horizon Zero Dawn @ 4K Ultra (maybe some tweaking of settings was involved, don't remember) and it worked quite well.

And also the amount for Afterburner's osd (for example) doesn't show the true VRM usage, rather how much it reserves it. Kinda same with RAM, I've had only one situation when playing a game (FF XV) the RAM usage went over 16GB. Anyway, with 16GB, there were zero problems.

 

[cvaldes]

Nvidia is marketing the 3060 and 3060 Ti as 1080p gaming cards. The 3070 and 3070 Ti are 1440p gaming cards, the 3080 and 3080 Ti are 4K gaming cards.

The sweet spot for current 1080p gaming is 8GB. As mentioned above, Nvidia's choice was 6GB or 12GB VRAM for a 192-bit memory bus.

There is no videogame running at 1080p that will use up 12GB of VRAM. It is unlikely that there would be videogames like this in the near future because the two 4K videogame consoles (Xbox Series X and PS5) have 16GB of RAM (which is shared between the CPU and GPU).

A 3060 with 12GB VRAM will be bandwidth starved. Basically 4GB of VRAM will be wasted in 1080p gaming.

OP's usage case is 1440p gaming. Because of this, OP will benefit more on all games from a more powerful GPU over scads of VRAM. The 3060 Ti is a no brainer here.

 

[Keullo-e]

As mentioned above, Nvidia's choice was 6GB or 12GB VRAM for a 192-bit memory bus.

Could mixed density be still used? Like GTX 550 Ti had 1GB and 192-bit bus and 660/660 Ti had 2GB/192-bit.

 

[cvaldes]

Could mixed density be still used? Like GTX 550 Ti had 1GB and 192-bit bus and 660/660 Ti had 2GB/192-bit.

I don't have an electrical engineering degree (nor do I design GPUs for a living) so I'm not qualified to provide an authoritative answer.

That said my assumption is that mixed densities cause significant performance issues otherwise Nvidia and AMD would already be doing this to reduce cost.

 

[Keullo-e]

I don't have an electrical engineering degree (nor do I design GPUs for a living) so I'm not qualified to provide an authoritative answer.

That said my assumption is that mixed densities cause significant performance issues otherwise Nvidia and AMD would already be doing this to reduce cost.

Yeah, I know what you mean there. Thinking the same, as 550 Ti for example had 4x128MB + 2x256MB chips, that would it've been different if it had 768MB or 1.5GB indtead of 1GB as with a card like that, the memory wasn't a bottleneck.

 

[Batou1986]

Could mixed density be still used? Like GTX 550 Ti had 1GB and 192-bit bus and 660/660 Ti had 2GB/192-bit.

Bus width determines how many memory lanes are available which in turn limits how many memory chips are used on the card.
I'm assuming the size of available GDDR6 chips is the factor at play here the 3060 uses 6 2gb chips while the 3060ti uses 8 1gb chips.
To get 8 gb out of 6 memory lanes you would need some weird 1.3gb GDDR chips.
Also both your examples use the same bus width so the same amount of chips the only difference being the density of the chips.

 

[Keullo-e]

Bus width determines how many memory lanes are available which in turn limits how many memory chips are used on the card.
I'm assuming the size of available GDDR6 chips is the factor at play here the 3060 uses 6 2gb chips while the 3060ti uses 8 1gb chips.
To get 8 gb out of 6 memory lanes you would need some weird 1.3gb GDDR chips.
Also both your examples use the same bus width so the same amount of chips the only difference being the density of the chips.

To get 8GB with 192bit bus you could use 4x1GB + 2x2GB chips. Similar to what they did with those cards I mentioned.

 

[Batou1986]

To get 8GB with 192bit bus you could use 4x1GB + 2x2GB chips. Similar to what they did with those cards I mentioned.

This is true as you speculated the speed latency of the chips might vary which is why they avoided that.