What resolution... Agree that a 1060 would be much preferred over the 1050 Ti .... however if the budget is a bit stretched, than the 3 GB version is the wiser choice, if monitor resolution is 1080p. The extra 3 GB of VRAM delivers squat according to TPU testing.
The 6GB card however is a different card than the 3 GB card. The 6GB card has 10% more shaders and that gives it a 6% speed advantage. So when you compare performance at 1080p, TPUs testing shows a 6% performance advantage for the 6 GB refence card. Yes the 3 GB card is AIB versus the 6 GB reference card but it's not relevant to this discussion... it will take a few more sentences to explain why.
***
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1050_Ti_Gaming_X/images/perfrel_1920_1080.png***
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/images/perfrel_1920_1080.png
Looking at this data alone, how could we possibly tell whether the 6% advantage comes from the +10% shaders or the extra VRAM ? It's actually "plain as day". If VRAM was a contributing factor to the 6% performance advanatge, then we can assuredly expect the advantage to increase if we jump to 1440p. It does not. At 1080p / 1440p, VRAM is clearly not having an impact on performance. That's not saying that one day, a game won't come along where 3 GB is not enough at 1440p.... but 1080p is clearly a safe bet for the foreseeable future. Another way to look at it is this.... if 2160p = 4 x 1080p, then if 3 GB is not enough for 1080p, then 12 GB is clearly not enough for 4 x 1080p. Antd yet, today there are no 12 GB cards in existence. If there was a need, it would have been filled by now.
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/images/perfrel_2560_1440.png
***
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1050_Ti_Gaming_X/images/perfrel_2560_1440.png***
Given the choice, cost aside I'd want the 6GB for the 10% extra shaders. So what it is likely to come down to is relative gain versus relative cost. Wasn't so long ago, the cost difference was $100, which made it hard to justify for 6% perfomance difference. But today for example, on pcpartpicker.
MSI 1060 Gaming X 3 GB is $282
MSI 1060 Gaming X 6 GB is $299
That's a $17 (6%) cost increase for a 6% increase in performance. That makes it pretty easy to justify .... and tho haven't seen games in which performance is inhibited by 3 GB at 1080p inhibiting performance outside the shaders, your covered in case one comes along in the future.
If those numbers are stretching the budget ....
MSI 1060 3GT OC (3 GB) is $245
MSI 1060 3GT OC (6 GB) is $270
That's 25 bucks and a 10.2% increase in price... one way to look at is 10% cost for 6% trade off is bad trade... OTOH, it's not the card only that is delivering that fps, it's the whole computer... so that $25 should really be considered against whole cost.
if it were me, I'd take the 6 GB Gaming X cause it's agreat card... if budget a concern, then the 3 GB OCT is a good choice, you won't miss the 6GB if at 1080p ... at 1440p. neither the 1060 or the the 3 GB is really something id be comfy with.
