NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB Variant Benched by Chinese Reviewer, Lags Behind 16 GB Sibling in DLSS 4 Test Scenario

[Deleted member 187435]

8GB is fine! With MFG I can still get >60 FPS! And you don't need ultra! I can also just run 720p upscale.. oh wait I already was. Euhhmmm! Its great! The more you buy the more you save! Herp derp

Its also funny how the 16GB card this time, when actually equipped with more than entry-level bandwidth, now does manage to sprint ahead of its 8GB sibling. Nvidia knows its becoming very hard to hide this immense disparity that is now undeniably just due to VRAM capacity.

But its fine, right! 'Its only an x60, this is normal'

The interesting thing for me in the graph I posted above, is how the 5060 Ti 8GB is only ahead of the 4060 Ti 8GB by the same percentage that it has extra cores (5%). The bandwidth in that particular benchmark appears to be making no difference at all. Obviously this will vary and it has to make a difference most of the time I assume, but not in this case.

I hope these cards all get properly put through their paces. There is no point in testing the 8GB cards at undemanding settings and then declaring that 8GB isn't a handicap. I think TPU has fallen into that trap a little bit. Choose more demanding games and/or settings and then we'll really see.

 

[Vayra86]

The interesting thing for me in the graph I posted above, is how the 5060 Ti 8GB is only ahead of the 4060 Ti 8GB by the same percentage that it has extra cores (5%). The bandwidth in that particular benchmark appears to be making no difference at all. Obviously this will vary and it has to make a difference most of the time I assume, but not in this case.

I hope these cards all get properly put through their paces. There is no point in testing the 8GB cards at undemanding settings and then declaring that 8GB isn't a handicap. I think TPU has fallen into that trap a little bit. Choose more demanding games and/or settings and then we'll really see.

If both cards are already limited by the VRAM capacity (which they clearly are, seeing as the 16GB 5060ti scores higher, and you can't attribute that to shaders), then the bandwidth won't help much. If they game in question would juggle much more over the existing bandwidth, you would see a bigger gap.

All engines/games handle the data transport differently. The optimal situation is that they can hold the entire game in VRAM - or the entire potential library of stuff it needs at that point, but if the data needs to be streamed constantly, you're pushing harder on bandwidth. And lots of games are like that. That is, at its core, how the VRAM capacities could go down over time relative to core performance - a more efficient and effective way to keep having the right data in VRAM at the right time. Cache, then, helps a bit further on responsiveness as its a fast lane that could temporarily fill a bandwidth gap.

Its all just signs of the bar moving up. People that think 'because engines do it differently, we can make do with less' are getting it wrong: developers/engines are adapting to keep providing for hardware that is actually already underpowered. In the end, the underpowered hardware is even enough of a market influence to cause limits in games themselves.

This is why I can see 13GB-16GB used in games like Total War Warhammer 3; and others can still play it on the same settings on an 8GB card. Except when they zoom in rapidly on the campaign map, they get a brief stutter as the VRAM needs to wait for better LoD assets for a millisecond or five more than I would on my card that can hold all of that stuff close by. Now... would the 8GB card owner say their game didn't run properly because of that? I reckon that only happens if you know what you're looking at. \

That's why many folks defend their 8GB illusionary world of 'look it runs fine' .... ignorance is bliss. Only when you place it right next to the same thing running on a better piece of hardware, you will notice, feel, see, the difference. Similar things apply to dynamically adjusting (texture) quality on the fly. These tricks are used. Many people think that's just how its supposed to look.

 

[lexluthermiester]

This one. Where would you guess the 4060 Ti 16GB would fit in here?

It's not shown so... However, we KNOW the 4060ti 16GB performance specs and they would like fit a just a few percent above the 8GB version as has been PROVEN.

The 8GB 5060 Ti is only 5% quicker than the 4060 Ti 8GB and that's all from the increased core count.

Why do you bother? You've brought a blade or grass to a gun fight. Seriously with that?

 

[bug]

AMD also demonstrated neural rendering running on RDNA4:

FSR4 is close to DLSS4. RDNA4 is used in the PS5 PRO,so lots of developers will use it features.

AMD RDNA 4 and Radeon RX 9000-series GPUs start at $549: Specifications, release date, pricing, and more revealed

Everything you need to know about AMD's RDNA 4 GPU architecture and graphics cards.

www.tomshardware.com

You mean this one? https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/gr...-artifacting-thats-had-me-scratching-my-head/

And if you think generating one intermediary frame is "close to" generating three... well, more power to you, I guess.

 

[Deleted member 187435]

It's not shown so... However, we KNOW the 4060ti 16GB performance specs and they would like fit a just a few percent above the 8GB version as has been PROVEN.

Why do you bother? You've brought a blade or grass to a gun fight. Seriously with that?

I don't know what any of that means. You asked which graph led me to infer the 5060 Ti 8GB might struggle against the 16GB 4060 Ti 16GB and I showed you.

Using those numbers you can extrapolate / infer the following framerates.

1080p

5060 Ti 16GB, 39-47 (18% min & 12% avg faster than the 5060 Ti 8GB)
4060 Ti 16GB, 36-45 (inferred by it being the same percentage faster than 4060 Ti 8GB)
5060 Ti 8GB, 33-42
4060 Ti 8GB, 31-40

1440p

5060 Ti 16GB, 31-40 (14% & 11% faster than 5060 Ti 8GB)
4060 Ti 16GB, 29-36 (inferred)
5060 Ti 8GB, 29-36
4060 Ti 8GB, 26-33

 

[lexluthermiester]

I don't know what any of that means.

Then you have the problem and we're done here.

 

[theglaze]

It (usually) takes high graphics + high resolution + features like Ray Tracing to make 8GB a big problem.

Example:

But when you add up the totals in the charts, you realize the gamer with 16GB VRAM on his 4060 or 5060 isn't going to be playing with those settings anyways.
Because the FPS is rubbish:

You could argue "yeah well increase DLSS and Frame Generation to get the FPS higher..." and then you sound like Mr.Huang

 

[lexluthermiester]

It (usually) takes high graphics + high resolution + features like Ray Tracing to make 8GB a big problem.

Example:
View attachment 395741

But when you add up the totals in the charts, you realize the gamer with 16GB VRAM on his 4060 or 5060 isn't going to be playing with those settings anyways.
Because the FPS is rubbish:

View attachment 395743

You could argue "yeah well increase DLSS and Frame Generation to get the FPS higher..." and then you sound like Mr.Huang

Exactly! Highlighting the 2160p(4k) numbers, no it's a rosy picture. The thing the naysayers are conveniently ignoring is 99.9% of the people buying a 4060 or 5060 are NOT going to be playing at 2160p.


@ All
Many of you naysayers are irritated and annoyed(boo woo) that someone like me, knowledgeable, intelligent and knows the score, is arguing in favor of 8GB cards. It confounds you to the point of all of this nonsense and frustrates you to the point of calling me a moron(or implying same). I'm soo hurt...

The context you all have either missed or are deliberately and blatantly ignoring is that a LARGE percentage of the PC gaming public can only afford budget offerings and they need someone, like myself, to assure them that they can still get a solid and good gaming experience from their budget minded purchase. They need to know that to get a fun time, they only need to tinker/tweak with their settings and they're off & running!

Will 8GB always be enough? No, we are closing in on a time when it will not be enough for most AAA gaming. But that time is not yet and will not be for a few years to come.

So stop for a moment and think of OTHERS in the world instead of your own selfish, petty and lacking concerns. If you don't want an 8GB card, that's cool, get something else. Quit your pointless, meritless, pedantic whining and bemoaning. You're not helping anything or anyone. All you're doing is stroking your own ego's.

 

[Deleted member 187435]

It (usually) takes high graphics + high resolution + features like Ray Tracing to make 8GB a big problem.


But when you add up the totals in the charts, you realize the gamer with 16GB VRAM on his 4060 or 5060 isn't going to be playing with those settings anyways.
Because the FPS is rubbish:

Here's 1080p, it looks like the 4060 Ti 16GB can manage a good framerate. How does the 8GB card do? Oops.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Here's 1080p, it looks like the 4060 Ti 16GB can manage a good framerate. How does the 8GB card do? Oops.

Thank You for proving my above point with your nitpicking and cherry-picking. That is ONE game. It is not all games. Learn how to context and contemplate logic in a reasonable way and you will likely stop with your silly knee-jerk reactions.

 

[theglaze]

Here's 1080p, it looks like the 4060 Ti 16GB can manage a good framerate. How does the 8GB card do? Oops.

Console ports be like that The PS5 version literally came out yesterday or today. I doubt that dev team has the resources to simultaneously tackle PC optimizations.
Heck, with Bethesda as the publisher, it would be massively ironic if they pressure the dev to circle back to improve customer happiness by fixing technical limitations of the dev's game design on PC.

 

[Deleted member 187435]

I thought you said we were done? All you do is argue in bad faith and keep moving the goal posts. There are loads of games where the 8GB card falls far short of the 16GB one, including at 1080p.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I thought you said we were done?

You are. No one with any sense is going to take what you're saying seriously.

All you do is argue in bad faith and keep moving the goal posts.

Keep telling yourself that. My stance has been EXCATLY the same since this whole "8GB is not enough" BS started.

There are loads of games where the 8GB card falls far short of the 16GB one, including at 1080p.

Moose Muffins. There are a few, not "loads". Oh, just an FYI, the problems involved in ALL of those games can be easy solved by...wait for it...turning down some settings. Tada... Budget PC Gaming 101.

 

[Han44]

Such poverty and failure, it has as much v-ram as 5080 , I don't understand Nv's policy, unless 24Gb is provided for 5080 Super Hiper Ti

 

[SOAREVERSOR]

Exactly! Highlighting the 2160p(4k) numbers, no it's a rosy picture. The thing the naysayers are conveniently ignoring is 99.9% of the people buying a 4060 or 5060 are NOT going to be playing at 2160p.


@ All
Many of you naysayers are irritated and annoyed(boo woo) that someone like me, knowledgeable, intelligent and knows the score, is arguing in favor of 8GB cards. It confounds you to the point of all of this nonsense and frustrates you to the point of calling me a moron(or implying same). I'm soo hurt...

The context you all have either missed or are deliberately and blatantly ignoring is that a LARGE percentage of the PC gaming public can only afford budget offerings and they need someone, like myself, to assure them that they can still get a solid and good gaming experience from their budget minded purchase. They need to know that to get a fun time, they only need to tinker/tweak with their settings and they're off & running!

Will 8GB always be enough? No, we are closing in on a time when it will not be enough for most AAA gaming. But that time is not yet and will not be for a few years to come.

So stop for a moment and think of OTHERS in the world instead of your own selfish, petty and lacking concerns. If you don't want an 8GB card, that's cool, get something else. Quit your pointless, meritless, pedantic whining and bemoaning. You're not helping anything or anyone. All you're doing is stroking your own ego's.

Most PC gamers are on potato PCs that get crushed by current consoles. It has always been this way. PC gaming is not the master race or the best. Far from it. It's shit tier gaming made valid by the ability to steal games, cheat, and now Steam sales. Which a bunch of morons claiming it's god tier because some people on forums who don't game that much have rigs most people will never be able to afford all while not play that many games on them. It's always been this way. It always will be this way.

There's a reason gamers have a nasty reputation and PC gamers have an even worse one.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Most PC gamers are on potato PCs that get crushed by current consoles. It has always been this way.

There is some of that, sure, not as much as you might think though. I see the systems people bring in to upgrade and service. Some are potatoes, most are not. Most times when they bring in a machine to get a GPU, it also needs some help with RAM or a better drive. Once in a while a CPU upgrade is in order and is often very easily done.

PC gaming is not the master race or the best.

This is were we will disagree. PC Master race is a thing. Consoles frequently do not compare.

It's shit tier gaming made valid by the ability to steal games, cheat, and now Steam sales.

I'm not touching that "bag of angry cats"..

Which a bunch of morons claiming it's god tier because some people on forums who don't game that much have rigs most people will never be able to afford all while not play that many games on them. It's always been this way. It always will be this way.

There some of that too. Most people however are sensible & reasonable. Explaining the facts of the situation to them helps them better understand what their options are and what they can get out of a potential upgrade path.

There's a reason gamers have a nasty reputation and PC gamers have an even worse one.

We all know about that sad aspect of things. Again though, that's not most people. It's mostly the obnoxious few who seem to enjoy showing everyone how they can't tell their bum from a whole in the ground, and frequently have head in both.

 

[Vayra86]

Will 8GB always be enough? No, we are closing in on a time when it will not be enough for most AAA gaming. But that time is not yet and will not be for a few years to come.

The time is here, and it makes itself known ever more. If you can 'play' around that in your gaming time, then that's fine. If you are 'forced to' because you can't afford or dont want to spend more, thats fine. Nobody is arguing with that. The point here is the price point you are still paying for this 8GB E-waste, that IS obsolete in a couple of years entirely except if you want to play old stuff.

If this was the entry level x50, I wouldn't be complaining. x60 should be having 12GB at this (price) point. Simple as. AMD is not exempt from that either btw.

And for me - the simple conclusion here remains : either save up and spend a bit more to get a 12GB+ card, or just don't spend at all - wait, until a reasonable offer comes around, because the current x60(ti) line up is none. The 16GB excluded btw, it has some legs to it, but still prohibitively expensive.

 

[lexluthermiester]

The point here is the price point you are still paying for this 8GB E-waste, that IS obsolete in a couple of years entirely except if you want to play old stuff.

That is an opinion. My personal laptop has a GTX1660ti 6GB in it and only requires a few settings be turned down for solid mobile gaming. THAT is an obsolete GPU which is way out classed by a 5060 and it still holds it's own at 1080p with only 6GB.

5060's, 9060's, etc, etc are going to do fine for the budget market with 8GB and will continue to do so. That is not opinion, it is fact supported by all the numbers we look at. Refusing to accept that part of reality doesn't change that reality.

If this was the entry level x50, I wouldn't be complaining.

If wishes were fishes....

x60 should be having 12GB at this (price) point.

On that point, I would not disagree. Moreover, I think the 8GB cards should be priced lower. But we're not in control the decision makers that can change things in the near term, so it's a moot point.

AMD is not exempt from that either btw.

Intel too.

 

[theglaze]

8GB E-waste, that IS obsolete in a couple of years entirely except if you want to play old stuff.

And with 70% of Steam gamers on 8GB VRAM or less, and 75% are using GeForce... are you suggesting Nvidia is herding their cattle to the cliff for a big feast of future profits??

If only there was evidence that Nvidia lies about performance, manipulates supply and distribution for profit, and coerces the industry to its favor

 

[Vayra86]

That is an opinion.

Your comments are as well, despite you thinking otherwise. Its a forum, where opinions are shared. That's the baseline you or I can never escape. Your supposed 'as stated' facts are colored by your personal perception, as are mine. And price definitely does factor in to that perception too. So I don't really understand why you need to make a quality assessment between what we are saying, where there is none. It certainly won't make you 'right' about this subject Its just what you think about it, and 'we disagree' covers that adequately. You don't live on another plane of 'correct', no matter how badly you like to say you do.

On that point, I would not disagree. Moreover, I think the 8GB cards should be priced lower. But we're not in control so it's a moot point.

We are in control much more than you think. The whole reason Nvidia is releasing a double VRAM midranger is precisely because we exert control over demand. Again, a matter of perception, not fact I do believe consumers have the power to adjust and change markets, and this is especially true in a vibrant and super elastic market like the gaming market. The misinformed belief that we cannot exert control is part of the reason discrete GPU is where it is today. People are ill informed about hardware components and feed bad actors. Its not very different from voters being silly in democracies - defending your freedoms is essential and yes its hard work that never stops.

If only there was evidence that Nvidia lies about performance, manipulates supply and distribution for profit, and coerces the industry to its favor

There's sufficient evidence on that, surely we don't need to reiterate those events? They're quite recent. Blackwell launch:

NVIDIA is Selling Lies | RTX 5070 Founders Edition Review & Benchmarks | GamersNexus

GPUs NVIDIA is Selling Lies | RTX 5070 Founders Edition Review & Benchmarks March 13, 2025 Last Updated: 2025-03-13 We analyze the RTX 5070’s specs, pricing, gaming performance, ray tracing, and power efficiency The Highlights The RTX 5070 has 6144 CUDA cores, a 192-bit bus, and 12GB of GDDR7...

gamersnexus.net

Let's not get into this rabbit hole shall we. The evidence is one search away. Name a subject and I'll find it for you.

Oops! This just slipped out of my hands

NVIDIA Settles Class-Action Lawsuit Over GTX 970 Memory

NVIDIA settled in a 2015 class-action lawsuit against it, for misrepresenting the amount of memory on GeForce GTX 970 graphics cards. The company has agreed to pay every buyer of the card USD $30 (per card), and also cover the legal fees of the class, amounting to $1.3 million. The company...

www.techpowerup.com

And with 70% of Steam gamers on 8GB VRAM or less, and 75% are using GeForce... are you suggesting Nvidia is herding their cattle to the cliff for a big feast of future profits??

The modus operandi of each x60 release prior to Ampere (even Turing's 2060 was quite an OK bit of progress) is to elevate the 'bottom end' of the discrete gaming market a little bit, or even substantially, from gen to gen. What you've been having now is people really not quite capable of upgrading to the next x60 because A. the price point is higher and B. there is literally no progress in the segment to speak of.

Nvidia is simply locking the segment down and/or forcing an upsell to a higher tier. The end result for those who cannot afford that tier, is practically that they have no upgrade path.
The fixation on the 'look at muh steam charts' factoids are not entirely fair: of course, if the market's been fed 8GB GPUs for over 10 years, you'll find a majority of 8GB cards in the Charts. Do we need any more open doors to kick in here...

 

[Chrispy_]

Nah, you can’t draw any conclusions between 9 and 13 fps. Anyway raster performance could be close between 8 and 16gb, but clearly worse dlss4 and FG, that defies Nvidia’s advertising.

You can see from the TPU 5060Ti reviews that in the current suite of TPU testing (without FG, without DLSS) that the 4060Ti 8G/16G are still performing similarly. The reality is that the framerates aren't high enough to use those cards - even at 1080p in some games, so gamers are going to turn on FG and/or DLSS which both use a lot of additional VRAM that may push the 8GB models into an unplayable slideshow. We need to wait for proper reviews to land.

 

[Deleted member 187435]

I found another review which shows what happens when the 8GB limit is breached, even at 1080p. I see on TPU's review that they had the 4060 Ti 8 and 16 cards performing the same on Horizon Forbidden West but not so here:

The kitguru review used 'very high' settings. It doesn't seem unreasonable that someone playing a game on a 60 series card at 1080p would wish to use such settings, and indeed the card can handle it, at least the 16GB one can.

Horizon Forbidden West is a game that uses more than 8GB VRAM even at 1080p, when using the Very High preset. Of course, that's no issue for the 5060 Ti 16GB, but even then, performance gains over the 4060 Ti 16GB are almost non-existent. I wonder if there's another limitation at play – perhaps memory bandwidth, or even PCIe lanes? It's hard to say, but just a 3% gain over its predecessor at 1080p is very disappointing.

Nvidia RTX 5060 Ti 16GB Review ft. Gigabyte & Palit - KitGuru

Nvidia's RTX 5060 Ti is the latest Blackwell GPU to hit the market - and yes, there is still an 8GB

www.kitguru.net

 

[bug]

Exactly! Highlighting the 2160p(4k) numbers, no it's a rosy picture. The thing the naysayers are conveniently ignoring is 99.9% of the people buying a 4060 or 5060 are NOT going to be playing at 2160p.

I mean, you'd think it's common sense a mid-range card cannot handle high-end res with all the bells and whistles...

 

[evernessince]

I mean, you'd think it's common sense a mid-range card cannot handle high-end res with all the bells and whistles...

A couple of problems:

1) Nvidia is selling these cards on those "Bell and whistles". They sold the GTX 980 and 980 Ti on 4K gaming, the 1000 series on high FPS high efficiency, and the RTX 2000 series and later on RTX. If you want to blame anyone for these cards not meeting expectations, blame Nvidia. Trying to say customers shouldn't expect what they were sold on is a wild twisting of the narrative to cover Nvidia's tracks.

2) These cards are selling for $600+. Adjusting for inflation, that 100% used to get you a banger card with all the bells and whistles. The GTX 970 for example is $452 inflation adjusted and that got you PhsyX, multi-monitor, etc. It was also 76% of flagship performance, meanwhile you get a piddly 34% with the 5060 Ti for MORE money. It's no surprise when people are spending 37% more (inflation adjusted) and getting less than HALF the performance they used to. Customers should expect to get all the bells and whistles at this price point and instead they get a mobile class GPU that already has issues playing games out of the box and lousy performance. Forget about it long term.

3) Your "common sense" isn't common at all. It's a fraction of a fraction. PC gaming only represents a small fraction of all people and PC enthusiasts make up less than 1% of that market. The word "common sense" is way overused in enthusiast communities from individuals that don't go outside their bubble. Nvidia's intent of having an 8GB and 16GB is to trick the 99%, who aren't enthusiasts. A little compassion and understanding of others would go a long way here.

 

[Chrispy_]

I found another review which shows what happens when the 8GB limit is breached, even at 1080p. I see on TPU's review that they had the 4060 Ti 8 and 16 cards performing the same on Horizon Forbidden West but not so here:

View attachment 395797

Might be canned benchmark vs actual in-game scene or test loop? Neither @Wizzard nor Kitguru explain exactly what they're testing. The fact that TPU's 1080p result for this game is 91fps and Kitguru's 1080p result is 72fps proves that they're definitely not testing the same scene.

Kitguru do mention that they record framerates using frameview and average the result of three runs, as well as explicitly mentioning that HFW is one of their twelve raster-only titles with no raytracing and no DLSS, which matches TPUs settings so it's possible they're doing manual runs around an area that needs more than 8GB, while the TPU test area fits in 8GB VRAM.