NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 8 GB

[lexluthermiester]

PRO

• $300—low price point

Are you kidding me @W1zzard ?

And this is what I was talking about above..

 

[Dr. Dro]

PRO

• $300—low price point

Are you kidding me @W1zzard ?

Arc B580 aside, which is a valid option provided you can buy one at its MSRP and that it is available in your area (Intel slipped hard here), it is the lowest priced current generation product at this segment level.

 

[pavle]

Cute 144Watt card if it were cheaper.

 

[wolf]

Does not change the fact that this card should be a 30€ card, like the nivida 710 and nvidia 730 which i put many in desktop computers at work.
Looks the same

There's no way it could be that cheap when a new sku in 2025. Looks like maybe AMD is about to release the fastest 8gb card ever at the same price at the 5060.

PRO

• $300—low price point

Are you kidding me @W1zzard ?

It's less his opinion than it is a finding of the exhaustive testing. He ran the benchmarks, compared the results to their respective costs, and the 5060 is at the top of the price to performance leader board.

 

[jabbadap]

All things considered, $300 for a xx60 card is not too bad. I remember 1660 being the best bang for buck choice, but wiz's database says it was priced $230 precovid so $300 tracks inflation pretty well. But it doesn't look like it has enough power to run 1080p at max (and need to turn off RT for some games), so lets see if the TI version is going to be any better.

1660 Super was best bang for the buck(ti speeds for 1660 money) and what TI version? 5060TI were launched on March. Or do you mean maybe coming Super versions?

On the topic though this seems to be fine for casual 1080p gaming/esports card/htpc card. Price is just little off, would have hoped Intels B580 putting a little more pressure to lower the prices. Not that it's means much though, seems to be available at the same price point here(Finland) as was b580 at launch(b580 has never reached 276€ msrp here, not even close).

 

[Bomby569]

The price isn't great, but it's also what we got, unless people here start making home made gpus and selling them...you just seem like those old mans complaining that a bus ticket was 2 cents back in their days.
Shit isn't getting any better and AMD and Intel isn't coming to safe us. Maybe the Chinese one day.

If someone wants to buy new, this is 2025, and what we got. If the reviewer said it was too expensive, based on arbitrary values that simply don't exist, it wouldn't help anyone.
I refuse to buy into this madness, but if someone doesn't have a gpu/ if i didn't had a gpu, there wasn't much i could do if i wanted to get a new one.

 

[Francoporto]

Disgusting, this perf should be the perf of an RTX 5050, ok, but not a 5060 for 400€.

 

[abraham_koala]

Why pcie 5.0 counts as a "pros"? What is so positive about it?

 

[JustBenching]

That's mostly a reflection of the 2025 gpu market more than this card being good.

I don't envy reviewers in 2025 though it's difficult treading the line and trying to show the pros/cons of a product without coming across as being biased for or against a specific brand.

Nvidia is definitely not helping them out lol.

I'm sure W1z put a ton of work into this review and probably knew regardless of how he felt about it there would be backlash for or against but I honestly think reviewers should just say what they feel about a product regardless of what the internet reaction will be and I feel tpu does a pretty good job of that.

Funny thing is, performance / $ is as objective as it gets. If Nvidia is topping the perf / $ chart it's because... Well, duh, they offer the maximum amount of performance for a given pricepoint. Nvidia is for value conscious buyers, amd is for people that just dojt want to buy nvidia

Considering this card has a decent performance improvement over the 4060, I really don't understand why nvidia went to such lengths to block proper reviews before launch day. It really seemed as if they were trying really hard to scam consumers using mfg to cover a null improvement over the 4060, when the card is actually quite a better product than the 4060, even without mfg.

Honestly, given how mediocre the rest of the blackwell cards have been, blocking reviews would have made more sense in almost any other blackwell card other than this one and the 5090.

The product is great, but i can understand nvidia blocking reviews. Clickbait youtubers would ignore the fact that this card is the best performance per dollar card you can get and instead focus their videos on the inadequacy of 8gb vram for 4k Ultra PT.

 

[lexluthermiester]

The product is great, but i can understand nvidia blocking reviews. Clickbait youtubers would ignore the fact that this card is the best performance per dollar card you can get and instead focus their videos on the inadequacy of 8gb vram for 4k Ultra PT.

They're also forgetting, or deliberately ignoring, the fact that anyone who's interested in the 8GB offerings are not running 4k. Some of them might be 1440p but most will be running 1080p and more modest settings than "Max/Ultra".

 

[JustBenching]

It's all there in the review. Test methodology, game results, aggregates, then weighing performance against cost. This isn't the reviewers opinion, this is test results, prices and math.

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 8 GB Review

The GeForce RTX 5060 8 GB is NVIDIA's newest release. It is built using the same chip as the RTX 5060 Ti, but only comes with an 8 GB VRAM option. In our review we run it through all our tests, including 1440p and 4K with and without ray tracing, and we also recommend optimal settings for...

www.techpowerup.com

Math is opionated now if you dont like the results of your calculations

 

[HD64G]

Since Hardware Unboxed started showing in videos that for the GPUs with lower than needed VRAM the textures don't load properly and they are blurry and low quality, it is a MUST that reviewers should check if that happens and show that in the charts next to the FPS number in order for the buyers to know if the GPU is good enough or not to play properly the specific game.

 

[JustBenching]

A good conclusion for RTX 5060 would be "The true cost of a cheap thing isn’t the price—it’s the time wasted before you buy the right one."
The cost of compromise is too big here, enjoy pop in, stutters, lower quality textures without even knowing the game doesn't have to look that bad and medium to low preset in the very near the future.

Do you actually understand that what you are saying implies that games will look worse and worse over time while requiring more vram? That's your argument in a nutshell. Arent there great looking games that work fine on 8gb? So why the hell would games look worse and worse?

 

[Scircura]

The product is great, but i can understand nvidia blocking reviews. Clickbait youtubers would ignore the fact that this card is the best performance per dollar card you can get and instead focus their videos on the inadequacy of 8gb vram for 4k Ultra PT.

Occam's razor: the drivers just weren't ready.

Nvidia is likely less excited about scoring a few extra sales from bamboozled buyers in the first days of a card's release, and more worried about the release reviews getting poor results for games without driver optimization. Hence the pre-release review requirement of only testing games from Nvidia's approved list.

 

[dir_d]

It really isn't. People complaining about prices are simply not paying attention to the market reality.

I agree the price isn't bad, but it should be cheaper for the 3rd iteration of the almost same card.

 

[Bubster]

I just won an RTX 5060 Msi Ventus Plus OC in a contest, and i'm amazed by the visual sharpness of the games ( playing in 4k) owning previously an RTX 3070 and 3080, it seems that Upscaling and picture quality of Blackwell is very noticeable, people are negatively focused on some gimmicky things but ignoring that 5060 Is beating 3060 ti, 3070, 4060, 4060ti both 8 and 16gb hands down, and i am certain that with the driver updates it will get a lot better. the only thing i think Nvidia should have done is give the memory option on 5060 to 12 or 16 Gb in addition to 8 gb but the memory bandwidth is a tremendous 448 Gb/s (vs 288 for 4060 ti) for an entry level card. I don't know what's the problem with those attention seeking drama queen scumbags on Youtube making all this Fuss. Seeking attention and creating fake controversy to get more attention and have more subscribers and views and thus more sponsors and more Money.
This card was so mis characterized by these Youtube scumbags & Leeches and yet it has a great performance/cost and great end user experience and allows more with DLSS 4 , MFG and other features... it's better than previous gen cards like 60 and 70 with a giant leap in Chip & memory performance but the reviews were killing it before it even was released !!!!! We live in really strange Times

 

[abraham_koala]

I just won an RTX 5060 Msi ventus Plus OC in a contest, and i'm amazed by the visual sharpness of the games ( playing in 4k) owning previously an RTX 3070 and 3080, it seems that Upscaling and picture quality of Blackwell is very noticeable, people are negatively focused on some gimmicky things but ignoring that 5060 Is beating 3060 ti, 3070, 4060, 4060ti both 8 and 16gb hands down, and i am certain that with the driver updates it will get a lot better. the only thing i think Nvidia should have done is give the memory option on 5060 to 12 or 16 Gb in addition to 8 gb but the memory bandwidth is a tremendous 446 Gb/s for an entry level card. I don't know what's the problem with those attention seeking drama queen scumbags on Youtube making all this Fuss. Seeking attention and creating fake controversy to get more attention and have more subscribers and views and thus more sponsors and more Money.
This card was so mis characterized by these Youtube scumbags & Leeches and yet it has a great performance/cost and great end user experience and allows more with DLSS 4 , MFG and other features... it's better than previous gen cards like 60 and 70 with a giant leap in Chip & memory performance but the reviews were killing it before it even was released !!!!! We live in really strange Times

What 4k? With 8gb vram buffer u cant even max out 2023 Re4 remake at 1080p

 

[dlgh7]

They're also forgetting, or deliberately ignoring, the fact that anyone who's interested in the 8GB offerings are not running 4k. Some of them might be 1440p but most will be running 1080p and more modest settings than "Max/Ultra".

Here is the thing. The reason we are still gaming at 1080p at all is the Graphics Cards company. Just like the reason we are stuck on the low end with 8gb graphics cards.

So let's look at history. In 1995 or 96 John Carmack programmed Quake for PC on a 1920x1080 Intergraph InterView 28hd96 CRT Monitor. https://crtdatabase.com/crts/intergraph/intergraph-interview-28hd96

The First Generation of Graphics Cards in Mainstream thought of as 1080p Graphics Capable cards would of been something like the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480. Released in 2010. That was 15 years ago.

DirectX 12 was announced at GDC in 2014 and released in 2015. 10 years ago.

For fun the first 8gb GPU was the AMD Radeon 290x released in 2013. 12 years ago. It can even run Cyberpunk 2077.

So is the industry really moving that slowly that we are still gaming at 1080p? Or is it moving this slow because Nvidia and AMD are trying to milk it for all it is worth?

For even more fun to show the state of how Nvidia is trying to lock things under "features" People have found a way to use AMD Vega cards from 2017 and play Indiana Jones even though the game requires Ray Tracing. Yet Vega can do it through software on Linux. https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-com...-at-well-over-30fps-in-linux-with-radv-driver

 

[JustBenching]

So is the industry really moving that slowly that we are still gaming at 1080p? Or is it moving this slow because Nvidia and AMD are trying to milk it for all it is worth?

It's partly nvidia and amd. It's also partly that visuals have hit diminishing returns. It's also partly that devs release unoptimized POS posing as games. I had a 9800x 3d, the fastest gaming chip, tuned to within an inch of it's life, was still dropping to 40 fps in eg. Jedi Survivor 2. Is that because AMD is "trying to milk it for all it's worth"? No, the software is just BAD.

 

[dlgh7]

It's partly nvidia and amd. It's also partly that visuals have hit diminishing returns. It's also partly that devs release unoptimized POS posing as games. I had a 9800x 3d, the fastest gaming chip, tuned to within an inch of it's life, was still dropping to 40 fps in eg. Jedi Survivor 2. Is that because AMD is "trying to milk it for all it's worth"? No, the software is just BAD.

Sure software and hardware companies are both a bit guilty. I mean I had an ATi X800 XL GPU. I remember when Bioshock released and the X800 series wasn't able to play Bioshock because they pushed out Shader Model 3. Except the X800 was definitely powerful enough to run the game. They just pushed a tech through that forced people to upgrade. They used to do this more often also with DirectX. Then we got a mod that let you play Bioshock on the older Shader Model 2 GPU's.

 

[Hecate91]

So is the industry really moving that slowly that we are still gaming at 1080p? Or is it moving this slow because Nvidia and AMD are trying to milk it for all it is worth?

The x60 tier from both Nvidia and AMD have stagnated, and they both have sold the same card 2-3 times with a different name. Nvidia is the one milking it for every last bit, AMD are the ones following the market leader, as stupid as it is thats how competition works when one has a near monopoly. It really is unfortunate that companies are causing such stagnation on 1080P, that reviewers have to list what settings you should use in order for games to be playable, and even more unfortunate to see people being shields for a company which is holding the industry back.

Occam's razor: the drivers just weren't ready.

If that is the case, then Nvidia shouldn't be throwing reviewers under the bus for unstable drivers.

It's partly nvidia and amd. It's also partly that visuals have hit diminishing returns. It's also partly that devs release unoptimized POS posing as games. I had a 9800x 3d, the fastest gaming chip, tuned to within an inch of it's life, was still dropping to 40 fps in eg. Jedi Survivor 2. Is that because AMD is "trying to milk it for all it's worth"? No, the software is just BAD.

You mean mostly Nvidia and partially AMD, visuals hit a peak years ago, but texture sizes are still increasing, and Nvidia has successfully sold everyone on RT, which also can't run on the 5060 without compromises, also game devs can only optimize so far on an 8GB vram frame buffer. For example compare the 8GB 5060Ti to the 16GB 5060Ti, there are instances where the 8GB card struggles while the 16GB performs significantly better, there is no reason in 2025 for a card to be artificially limited by VRAM at 1080P besides Nvidia pushing planned obsolescence for people on a budget to 1080p low/med. It'll be interesting to see if people have the same reactions to the 9060XT, if the 8GB version has similar performance.

They're also forgetting, or deliberately ignoring, the fact that anyone who's interested in the 8GB offerings are not running 4k. Some of them might be 1440p but most will be running 1080p and more modest settings than "Max/Ultra".

And some ignoring the point of reviewers using max or ultra for benchmark purposes.

 

[JustBenching]

You mean mostly Nvidia and partially AMD, visuals hit a peak years ago, but texture sizes are still increasing, and Nvidia has successfully sold everyone on RT, which also can't run on the 5060 without compromises, also game devs can only optimize so far on an 8GB vram frame buffer. For example compare the 8GB 5060Ti to the 16GB 5060Ti, there are instances where the 8GB card struggles while the 16GB performs significantly better, there is no reason in 2025 for a card to be artificially limited by VRAM at 1080P besides Nvidia pushing planned obsolescence for people on a budget to 1080p low/med. It'll be interesting to see if people have the same reactions to the 9060XT, if the 8GB version has similar performance.

If you want to put the blame on GPUs for not getting "good enough" performance in games then you have to put most of the blame on amd, since they have the slower cards, the cards with the less value (totally objective, performance / $) and the cards that currently and even more historically have been doing horribly in heavy games (RT / PT). But, im not blaming either of them, games have become notoriously heavy for not a lot of gains in visuals.

If you are saying that 8gb vram is "planned obsolescence" why the heck are you just mentioning nvidia? AMD also offers 8gb vram cards. In fact, nvidia offers the CHEAPEST gpus that have more than 8gb of vram. Amd does not. So - AMD is the prime culprit of the tactic called planned obsolescene - if that's your argument.

 

[dlgh7]

You mean mostly Nvidia and partially AMD, visuals hit a peak years ago, but texture sizes are still increasing, and Nvidia has successfully sold everyone on RT, which also can't run on the 5060 without compromises, also game devs can only optimize so far on an 8GB vram frame buffer. For example compare the 8GB 5060Ti to the 16GB 5060Ti, there are instances where the 8GB card struggles while the 16GB performs significantly better, there is no reason in 2025 for a card to be artificially limited by VRAM at 1080P besides Nvidia pushing planned obsolescence for people on a budget to 1080p low/med. It'll be interesting to see if people have the same reactions to the 9060XT, if the 8GB version has similar performance.

I think that GPU companies have moved away from brute power to relying on Software. I mean the fact you can run an RT only title on Linux on Vega released in 2017 which is 8 years ago. Vega released a year before Nvidia even announced their RTX cards that supported RT.

 

[JustBenching]

This is pretty clear, when it comes to limited vram and planned obsolescence - nvidias cheapest gpu with more than 8gb vram costs 220$ and is at the top of the value chart, amd's cheapest gpu with more than 8gb of vram costs 400$ and is at the bottom of the value chart. But somehow we have to keep talking about ngreedia...

 

[oxrufiioxo]

If you want to put the blame on GPUs for not getting "good enough" performance in games then you have to put most of the blame on amd, since they have the slower cards, the cards with the less value (totally objective, performance / $) and the cards that currently and even more historically have been doing horribly in heavy games (RT / PT). But, im not blaming either of them, games have become notoriously heavy for not a lot of gains in visuals.

If you are saying that 8gb vram is "planned obsolescence" why the heck are you just mentioning nvidia? AMD also offers 8gb vram cards. In fact, nvidia offers the CHEAPEST gpus that have more than 8gb of vram. Amd does not. So - AMD is the prime culprit of the tactic called planned obsolescene - if that's your argument.

The same energy need to be applied to the 9060XT 8GB review regardless of if it's 10-20% faster for sure. I will say at least AMD is giving gamers a choice and offering a 16GB model but when they hit retail my guess is they'll be expensive not becuase they are good but becuase the 5060/5060ti 8GB are just that bad. Only a company as big as Nvidia could help sell AMD cards over msrp lmao.



It's starting to feel like 50 shades of green in here....