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....
Exactly, people want fairness towards these 8GB cards, so then the same opinion needs to be applied to the 9060XT. I think AMD should've only went with a 16GB card, though the good thing is the MSRP for the 16GB is the same for what the 8GB 5060Ti sells for. Then again MSRP hasn't held up on any of these GPU's, MSRP is just as flawed as making claims of price/performance without actually talking about the performance of the card itself.
The 5060Ti review thread felt like 50 shades of green, now people are just passing around the kool-aid.
f 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 / $) and the cards that currently and even more historically have been doing horribly in heavy games (RT / PT). But, im not blaming either of them, games have become notoriously heavy for not a lot of gains in visuals.
If you are saying that 8gb vram is "planned obsolescence" why the heck are you just mentioning nvidia? AMD also offers 8gb vram cards. In fact, nvidia offers the CHEAPEST gpus that have more than 8gb of vram. Amd does not. So - AMD is the prime culprit of the tactic called planned obsolescene - if that's your argument.
I'm putting most of the blame on Nvidia because they have 90% of the market and the power to change the rest of the market in terms of VRAM and performance at the low end, but chose not to, instead milking the budget gamers for the 3rd time in a row with an 8GB card that doesn't even beat out the previous gen just one tier higher.
And you're not going to get decent RT performance out of a 5060, I doubt anyone buying an 8GB card even gives a crap about RT, let alone PT (interesting how the goal posts move to PT once the competition has improved with RT).
Having only 8GB is planned obsolescence no matter who is selling it, but you keep ignoring that Nvidia has the marketshare and mindshare with a chance to move the low end to 10 or 12GB, but still hasn't chosen to because of their disdain towards the consumer keeping a GPU any more than a single launch cycle.
This is pretty clear, when it comes to limited vram and planned obsolescence - nvidias cheapest gpu with more than 8gb vram costs 220$ 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...
View attachment 401605
Except you can't just talk about price/performance without looking at the performance of the card itself, it's slower than an RTX 3070 from 5 years ago, no progress from the 4060Ti from 2 years ago, and the 5060 has higher power consumption than the 4060. IMO, these things should be considered when purchasing an 8GB card, not just blindly buying a card on a single metric.