GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8GB performance revealed (The review that NVIDIA doesn't want you to see)

[Marees]

Performance summary at 1440p pcie5x

These games cause problems​

ComputerBase tested a total of 27 games. The GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB ran flawlessly in 12 of them. There were no noticeable or measurable advantages with the 16 GB model. In addition, there were four games where there were measurable differences between the two graphics cards, but these were not noticeable, at least not in the test sequence. However, this does not mean that this remains the case after extended play.

The gaming experience with the RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB on PCIe 5.0

	Flawless	slight impairment (only measurable)	slight impairment (noticeable)	severe impairment (just playable)	unplayable
AC Shadows			✓
Black Myth Wukong		✓
Call of Duty Black Ops 6	✓
Dragon Age					✓
Dragon's Dogma 2		✓
Empire of the Ants	✓
F1 24			✓
Final Fantasy XVI				✓
Frostpunk 2		✓
Ghost of Tsushima	✓
GoW: Ragnarok	✓
Horizon Fortbidden West			✓
Indiana Jones					✓
KCD 2	✓
Lego	✓
MechWarrior 5: Clans				✓
Monster Hunter Wilds				✓
Oblivion Remastered					✓
Outcast	✓
Satisfactory	✓
Senau's Saga Hellblade 2	✓
Silent Hill 2		✓
Spider-Man 2					✓
Stalker 2	✓
Star Wars Outlaws	✓
The Last of Us Part II				✓
Warhammer Space Marine 2	✓
Perfect: No negative effects whatsoever. Slight impairment (not noticeable): Small measurable impact on frame times, not noticeable. Slight impairment (noticeable): Noticeable effects such as lower FPS, but otherwise no problems. Severe impairment (just playable): Playable in itself, but severe, noticeable effects such as lag or significantly lower FPS. Severe impairment (unplayable): Major effects such as much lower FPS, much worse frame times.

https://www-computerbase-de.transla...te-2?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-GB

 

[sethk]

I wonder how the 5060Ti competes against the 4080 super and 3080

It’s slower than the 3080 (~10% at 1440p) and significantly slower than the 4080 super according to review benchmarks.

 

[_mockingbird]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKjKMsEVBIU

 

[Marees]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKjKMsEVBIU

So what would you do

1. If you had the option of buying 5060 ti 8gb vs arc
2. If you had to recommend one of the 2 for friends/relatives

 

[Prince Valiant]

Buy the Arc and save money or spend more and get the 16GB 5060ti depending on what they play.

 

[Haswellbeast]

Buy the Arc and save money or spend more and get the 16GB 5060ti depending on what they play.

or, as long as they have like... id say a 1070 or better, just save your damn money and don't give it to the greedy scalpers/companies!

 

[Haswellbeast]

or, as long as they have like... id say a 1070 or better, just save your damn money and don't give it to the greedy scalpers/companies!

Truthfully, it all comes down to: does it at least run the games you play. And even then, look for something used that will at least run them, not buying new. A 1070 is just what in my mind would run almost any game right now, as long as the expectations are reasonable. For simpler stuff, the RX 470/480/570/580 are the best value card period. $40-50 for a 580 is a steal!

 

[HockeyJon]

I just don't get their reasoning here from any perspective.. having a lower tier card than the x070 series with more VRAM than it or a version with obviously inadequate VRAM. Why dafuq did they not just make it 12GB and charge the same or slightly less than the 16GB variant? The 8GB card is almost e-waste with how much it gimps the GPU.

Two things:

1) Planned obsolescence. An 8GB card is already obsolete on launch today, regardless of what the shills will tell you (anyone who says a $380 GPU is only good for 1080p medium is a shill, plain and simple). What this does, though, is create a cheap card for OEMs like Dell and uninitiated consumers to buy with the halo Nvidia branding on it (because they are DA BEST), and then when it sucks next year, you buy another one. Nvidia will be happy to sell you a nerfed 12GB card in 2026 for your inevitable "upgrade".

2) The 8GB version launches at $379. The 16GB version launches at $429. You have a vastly inferior card for sale for a price not much lower than a vastly superior option. Nvidia knows that those who know will pony up this year for the 16GB version, and those that don't will just upgrade in a year or two, so they get to sell two cards with no additional effort.

So it makes total sense, just not for you, the consumer, but this is a gaming card, a class of customer that Nvidia cares less and less about with each passing day.

 

[HockeyJon]

Will see the price of the upcoming 9060xt 8GB version because it is an other product that could be hard to price well here.

12GB version of them would make significantly more sense and must be incoming. You can still make nice 8GB 1080p card, but you need a good price point, the 5060ti is just too mid price instead of low to be one.


Must be 3GB not ready in time/volume, 12GB 5060-12GB/16GB 5060ti-18GB 5070 all sound like a way nicer line up. That said 4060ti 16gb/4070 12gb was a thing, 3060 12gb, 3070-3080 at 8-10 also, so maybe not, maybe it was the original plan all along.

at least it seem, according to market where available cards exist:

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/?query=5060ti&availability_status[]=available
https://www.canadacomputers.com/en/search?s=5060+ti+


Seem to be making more 16Gb than 8gb version...

I'm generally a "no bad products, only bad prices" kind of guy, but AMD would be stupid to launch an 8GB card. It's already obsolete, and they have no market share. Keep your baseline at 12GB with the superior one at 16GB or higher and market that.

 

[HockeyJon]

This thread page is nearly 5 years old, with duscussion on how the 3080 would hold up:
https://hardforum.com/threads/the-slowing-growth-of-vram-in-games.1971558/page-3

5 years was once a very long time in the tech world with massive changes.
The 3080 has done great in that time and 10GB has been a sizeable advantage over 8GB.

All things considered, the 3080 has lived a long life with its vram size. New 12 GB cards at this performance tier will hold up very long as well.

And you could have gotten a lot more out of the card with a few extra gigs, but then you wouldn't be coming back to Nvidia to buy another one. Planned obsolescence is the design philosophy here.

 

[LukeTbk]

Keep your baseline at 12GB

128 bits bus could make that a bit uncomfortable, cutting down artificially to 96bits and clamshell it to 12gb with 12 modules is maybe not a big enough saving versus a 16gb to make sense if the yield of such a small die is already good enough with the full memory controller working.

rx 6600 is number 3 and 5 in he best selling GPU right now on amazon, the 6GB 3050 is #4,

On newegg, the 4060 8GB is number 1, 6600 is #6
On bestbuy trhe 8GB 7600 is number 2, the 6GB 3050 is number 4

Price it well, and it would sell I think, the most played steam games right now are according to them

Counter strike 2
Dota 2
PUBG
Bongo cat
Rust
Apex legends
Banana
Marvel rivals
Clair obscur 33
GTA 5
Baldurs gates 3
REPO

All game that a 8GB gpu can play perfectly fine.

 

[LukeTbk]

Planned obsolescence is the design philosophy here.

has it not be a bit the reserve here, the 1080 super, 2070 super, 1060, 3080, etc....

Have had super long life because even in 2025 new card 8GB is still super common ?

Easiest way to do planned obsolescence would be to do the complete opposite, augment vram quantity every gen, push tech that use a lot of vram, Turing has been one if not the most long lived GPU gen, 7 years old perfectly viable in 2025.

 

[HockeyJon]

128 bits bus could make that a bit uncomfortable, cutting down artificially to 96bits and clamshell it to 12gb with 12 modules is maybe not a big enough saving versus a 16gb to make sense if the yield of such a small die is already good enough with the full memory controller working.

rx 6600 is number 3 and 5 in he best selling GPU right now on amazon, the 6GB 3050 is #4,

On newegg, the 4060 8GB is number 1, 6600 is #6
On bestbuy trhe 8GB 7600 is number 2, the 6GB 3050 is number 4

Price it well, and it would sell I think, the most played steam games right now are according to them

Counter strike 2
Dota 2
PUBG
Bongo cat
Rust
Apex legends
Banana
Marvel rivals
Clair obscur 33
GTA 5
Baldurs gates 3
REPO

All game that a 8GB gpu can play perfectly fine.

But this is AMD we're talking about. AMD has to offer more than Nvidia if it plans to capture any market share. Nvidia has over 80% of the discrete GPU market. They can afford to put out obsolete crap like the 5060. As a matter of fact, they'll still sell it. If AMD wants to change the image of Nvidia being the superior product, then in the absence of better technology, they need to offer what they can offer, and VRAM is an easy way to do it because "bigger number better" to the uninitiated. No one is saying they HAVE to use a 128-bit bus. Either that, or bring in a steep discount. 8GB video cards are xx50-tier at best in 2025 and should be priced accordingly. $380 for that in 2025 is a joke, plain and simple.

 

[HockeyJon]

has it not be a bit the reserve here, the 1080 super, 2070 super, 1060, 3080, etc....

Have had super long life because even in 2025 new card 8GB is still super common ?

Easiest way to do planned obsolescence would be to do the complete opposite, augment vram quantity every gen, push tech that use a lot of vram, Turing has been one if not the most long lived GPU gen, 7 years old perfectly viable in 2025.

Being competitive with 5-7 year old GPUs is not an accomplishment, particularly when Nvidia is heavily marketing features like RT and DLSS as essentials in modern gaming that these older GPUs either lack or lack the horsepower to make them useable, and that 8GB is not sufficient to full take advantage of. Nvidia wants to sell this for $380. The 5060 represents performance I could have already had years ago. This isn't a product worth buying for anyone, especially considering the MSRP delta between the 8GB and 16GB cards is not that high. If all you want to play is CS:GO or something like that than sure, who cares, but if that's the case than you already have a PC that's running that title just fine, so I'm having a hard time identifying who this card is for beyond giving OEMs something to launch and creating a product that guarantees an upgrade from the same customer within 2 or 3 years.

 

[LukeTbk]

But this is AMD we're talking about. AMD has to offer more than Nvidia

Which can be via a smaller price tag (because yes a $300 9060 8GB if the market ever came back close to "msrp", would be tough sales)

Being competitive with 5-7 year old GPUs is not an accomplishment,

Exactly, but we cannot have planned obsolescence and slow/no improvement on the vram side going at the same time

The 5060 represents performance I could have already had years ago.

Exactly, does that match the idea that there was a big plan acted on to make the 2070 super deprecate artificially fast ? The opposite can be argued, Nvidia did a bit of forced non-obsolescence of its product, the 2020 3060 at 2020 msrp would still sell well right now, well priced 2080 super would be number 1 on the charts I think....

Let just say if there was a planned obsolescence if we track used card price since 2018,.... we would never see some crash for the 8-10GB model, 3080 has yet to be cheap to buy or 2080 super... the plan was abandoned or yet to be executed, the last 4-5 years must be the longest lived gpu with the slowest obsolesence and the best ability to keep their resale value since GPU became popular in the late 90s...

 

[Ranulfo]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKjKMsEVBIU

At least these cards are giving guys like Steve at HUB some good videos to make. 1080p numbers for a 2025 remaster ps4/5 game from 2020, 10fps 1% low:

 

[Marees]

For the sake of science:

Benchmarks​

The Last of Us Part II​

1080p Native, Very High Preset
At native 1080p using the very high preset, the 8GB 5060 Ti performed poorly, while the B580 ran smoothly. The B580 was 12% faster on average and an astonishing 540% faster for the 1% lows. This likely previews how these GPUs will compare in a few years, even at 1080p with reduced quality settings.

Final Fantasy 16​

1440p Upscaling Q, Ultra Preset
Enabling quality upscaling at 1440p drastically improved the B580's performance, delivering around 60 fps and surpassing the 8GB 5060 Ti by 46% – a margin that should never have been possible given the hardware tiers.

Horizon Forbidden West​

1440p Upscaling Q, Very High Preset
the B580 averaged 68 fps – a 152% increase in average frame rate and 241% improvement in 1% lows over the 5060 Ti.
1080p Native, Very High Preset
At native 1080p, the B580 maintained a significant lead, offering almost 70% better 1% lows and a smoother experience overall.
1440p Upscaling Q, High Preset
the B580 delivered 76 fps on average and 62 fps for 1% lows, beating the 5060 Ti by 85% and 130%, respectively.

Cyberpunk 2077​

1440p Upscaling Q, Ray Tracing: Medium
The B580 provided a smoother experience with 1% lows 87% higher than the 5060 Ti, which was essentially unplayable.


https://www.techspot.com/review/2983-nvidia-rtx-5060-8gb-vs-intel-arc-b580/

 

[zandor]

For the sake of science:
...
https://www.techspot.com/review/2983-nvidia-rtx-5060-8gb-vs-intel-arc-b580/

Sweet. I was hoping someone would compare an 8GB 5060Ti to a B580. I just think it's fun seeing a "$250" Intel card trade blows with a "$380" NVidia card. In a couple weeks they'll be able to do this to the RTX 5060.

I'd still like to see a B580 vs. 8GB card comparison where they tune the settings for all the cards to run at about 60fps then compare settings and image quality. Basically a "highest playable settings" comparison like [H] used to do. Maybe also not use presets all the time. In some of these games the ARC card isn't using all it's vram and isn't at top settings, so they could likely turn textures up a notch. They definitely could in Indiana Jones. 12GB cards can manage ultra textures, while 8GB models can't go past medium.

 

[_mockingbird]

Sweet. I was hoping someone would compare an 8GB 5060Ti to a B580. I just think it's fun seeing a "$250" Intel card trade blows with a "$380" NVidia card. In a couple weeks they'll be able to do this to the RTX 5060.

NVIDIA knows that reviews of the GeForce RTX 5060 will be very negative, so NVIDIA isn't providing reviewers with drivers.

That means that reviewers will not be able to start testing the cards until launch day, so there will be no reviews on launch day.

Hardware Unboxed:

Nvidia: "We're not hiding the RTX 5060, we're very proud of it and gamers will love it"

...also Nvidia: "We're going to launch the RTX 5060 on May 19th during Computex, and although reviewers have cards right now we won't be releasing the driver until they go on sale"

Andreas Schilling from Hardwareluxx:

Can confirm! For us this has the implications, that we will be not able to tests the RTX 5060 on May 19th, because almost the whole team will be at Computex. This also means no testing for the Computex week. Not only bad for us, but above all for consumers.

igor's lab:

This brief advance notice is aimed at all those who were perhaps looking forward to a detailed launch article on the GeForce RTX 5060 8 GB on May 19 and who I may now have to leave in the fog in disappointment. To avoid misunderstandings and unnecessary waiting: I will not (be able to) publish a review of the GeForce RTX 5060 here at the official launch. Not because the sample is missing – it’s already on the table – but because NVIDIA has decided not to provide any press drivers until the launch.

 

[zandor]

NVIDIA knows that reviews of the GeForce RTX 5060 will be very negative, so NVIDIA isn't providing reviewers with drivers.

I saw that, and I bet they'll regret it. This is just going to piss off reviewers and make the reviews even more negative. If they'd just let it ride the 5060 reviews would have been more positive than the 8GB 5060Ti reviews just because the 5060 will cost less, thus making 8GB less bad. Still bad, but less bad. Now reviewers are going to treat the 5060 as a scam.

 

[Ranulfo]

I saw that, and I bet they'll regret it. This is just going to piss off reviewers and make the reviews even more negative. If they'd just let it ride the 5060 reviews would have been more positive than the 8GB 5060Ti reviews just because the 5060 will cost less, thus making 8GB less bad. Still bad, but less bad. Now reviewers are going to treat the 5060 as a scam.

Maybe, I'll wait and see if any reviewers really go nuclear on Nvidia for this though. I doubt most will.

 

[zandor]

Maybe, I'll wait and see if any reviewers really go nuclear on Nvidia for this though. I doubt most will.

Most, maybe not. But the ones that shit on the 5060Ti 8GB will. They're already committed.

 

[Sir Beregond]

Because there is a portion of consumers that will always look for the most inexpensive product, even if it's technically not worth the trade off versus the product one or two tiers higher. Nvidia would be a fool to forgo those consumers to AMD hen they already know how many of them are out there. We ourselves see it in the Steam hardware charts were the xx60 class card is always has the highest amount of users by substantial amounts.

Edit: And again, those same consumers do not run into these made-up issues because they aren't trying to game outside 1080p and medium settings.

1080p Medium was conquered at least a decade ago. Why are we saying 1080p medium is all that $500 can buy you now? That's ridiculous.

 

[GoldenTiger]

1080p Medium was conquered at least a decade ago. Why are we saying 1080p medium is all that $500 can buy you now? That's ridiculous.

Graphics are a moving target... 1080p medium in 2010 was nothing like 1080p medium in 2025.

 

[zandor]

Graphics are a moving target... 1080p medium in 2010 was nothing like 1080p medium in 2025.

Exactly. It's a moving target and the requirements keep going up. Medium is whatever the game devs want it to be. Some of them have decided that you can't go past medium if you don't have more than 8GB of vram and hardware raytracing is required. Next they'll decide 8GB cards can only run on low.

There is a casual consumer crowd that doesn't get wound up about settings. I wouldn't say they're a 1080p medium crowd though. I know a couple of people like this, and what they want is to just push a button and have the game settings automatically optimized for their hardware. So load NV/AMD/Intel/MS/etc. game management app, press the optimize button, and voila! 60fps, or whatever is an appropriate target for a given game based on the type of game and their hardware.

 

[Thug Esquire]

A bit disingenuous since I have yet to see a single game that has this issues when playing at 1080p at medium settings. You know, where these GPUs are really meant to compete.

Honestly, the lower spec GPUs performance reviews make me really miss [H] reviews when they would conclude at what resolution and settings gamers would expect to use to have acceptable performance. All these tech tubers give me the below memes vibes so much. It's almost like they intentionally ignore the fact that a Prius level GPU isn't designed to compete in a quarter mile drag race.

View attachment 723997

Bruh, I can see that graphic design is your passion. Could you please make more of these cartoons. Other threads deserve this treatment

 

[ZeroBarrier]

Bruh, I can see that graphic design is your passion. Could you please make more of these cartoons. Other threads deserve this treatment

The memes begin to come out when someone says something truly moronic. When those other threads have truly moronic things, then the memes will be there too. Comprende?

 

[horrorshow]

That is a terrible argument.

Today, 8GB VRAM is already insufficient. Right now, you may be able to tweak some settings to get it to work, but games are becoming more VRAM demanding and insufficient VRAM will become more and more of an issue in the future.

Here's my take..

The majority of people on the forum are at 1440p or 4k, correct?

Me being at 1080p, I haven't hit the 8GB wall YET

 

[evhvis]

Here's my take..

The majority of people on the forum are at 1440p or 4k, correct?

Me being at 1080p, I haven't hit the 8GB wall YET

It will depend on the game as there are already some games that hit the wall, but lower the texture res automatically. There are several games where an 8GB card needs to be tuned at 1080p. E.g. Hogwarths legacy, Last of Us part 1, Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty (far more demanding than the base game) and more can't run on max settings on a 8GB card at 1080p. Typically what you miss out on is the highest res textures, RT etc. even if the chip itself is fast enough. Some games will increase VRAM usage over time so issues might not show until 10 or 30 minutes in. It will only get worse now that 12GB+ is on most of the mid-range and higher GPUs, making 8GB cards essentially the xx50 and lower cards from Nvidia. The number of titles that require low or medium settings with 8GB cards at 1080 will probably increase a lot in the next few years as the 4GB and 6GB cards are mostly gone.

It is kind of dumb IMO to buy an 8GB card to save maybe $40 and then have to run at 120fps at medium to high when the chip is plenty fast for very high with RT. I swapped my 3080 because 10GB was becoming a major issue at 1440P and the difference between 1080p and 1440p is rarely 25% more vram usage. Most of those who buy 8GB card today can't afford to upgrade every year and they will soon wonder why their FPS is so bad after setting max settings, even at 1080p. How many 8GB card buyers buy their cards with a life expectancy of 1-2 years or settle on low-medium settings?

 

[Marees]

Most of those who buy 8GB card today can't afford to upgrade every year and they will soon wonder why their FPS is so bad after setting max settings, even at 1080p. How many 8GB card buyers buy their cards with a life expectancy of 1-2 years or settle on low-medium settings?

Good point

 

[Marees]

Doom on id.tech engine


Based on our testing, multi-frame generation is buggy on the 8 GB model and flawless on the 16 GB model. Reducing the texture pool size to 1.5 GB on an 8 GB GPU is essential. For those wondering, the texture pool size can be increased to 4 GB on a 16 GB GPU without any performance hit, though we couldn't identify any visual or performance improvements as a result.

VRAM Debate: 8GB vs. 16GB​

Now let's talk about 8 GB GPUs in Doom: The Dark Ages, specifically the new 8 GB version of the RTX 5060 Ti. For the most part, 8 GB GPUs perform reasonably well in this game, and it's clear the developer has put effort into optimizing for that configuration. This makes sense, as the majority of PC gamers are still stuck on 8 GB GPUs, largely due to AMD and Nvidia continuing to ship low-VRAM models, and appear to be actively trying to kill PC gaming, but I digress.

As was the case with Space Marine 2, this game could greatly benefit from a proper 4K texture pack. While some textures look excellent, many appear low-resolution and lack detail when viewed at higher resolutions. We made similar comments about Space Marine 2, which some pushed back on – until the 4K texture pack was released. At that point, the game looked dramatically better but became unplayable on 8 GB cards.

To illustrate the difference, here's a look at how the 8 GB and 16 GB versions of the RTX 5060 Ti perform at 4K using DLSS Balanced upscaling during a large horde battle. While the 16 GB model's frame rate isn't great, the game is at least playable. In contrast, the 8 GB version is completely broken in this scenario – though this is an extreme case, meant to test VRAM limits.

Now, if we enabled DLSS quality upscaling at 1440p, the 8 GB 5060 Ti sees very little improvement over native performance, while the 16 GB model is roughly 40% faster. To further test VRAM saturation, we moved beyond the 30-second benchmark pass and played for several minutes.

Initially, the 16 GB card was about 42% faster. But a few minutes in, VRAM usage overwhelmed the 8 GB model, tanking its performance. This resulted in the 16 GB model delivering an 82% higher average frame rate – and over 200% better 1% lows.

We observed similar differences with the Nightmare and Ultra presets. Even the High preset showed some discrepancy, though Medium provided nearly identical performance and visuals, making it a more viable option for 8 GB GPUs.

https://www.techspot.com/review/2984-doom-dark-ages-benchmark/

 

[Marees]

NVIDIA grants RTX 5060 drivers access to media willing to publish ‘previews’​

https://videocardz.com/newz/nvidia-...s-access-to-media-willing-to-publish-previews

 

[Lifelite]

More news:


View: https://youtu.be/AiekGcwaIho

Also, random HardOCP appearance lol

 

[Marees]

In a couple of games spiderman 2 & oblivion Remastered there is noticeable difference even with DLSS at 1080p quality & 1440p balanced


View: https://youtu.be/C0_4aCiORzE

 

[Ranulfo]

More news:


View: https://youtu.be/AiekGcwaIho

Also, random HardOCP appearance lol

Don't tease me bro. 17m30s or so for the memory lane bit. Time linked below...should be anyway.


View: https://youtu.be/AiekGcwaIho?t=1053

 

[sethk]

128 bits bus could make that a bit uncomfortable, cutting down artificially to 96bits and clamshell it to 12gb with 12 modules is maybe not a big enough saving versus a 16gb to make sense if the yield of such a small die is already good enough with the full memory controller working.

rx 6600 is number 3 and 5 in he best selling GPU right now on amazon, the 6GB 3050 is #4,

On newegg, the 4060 8GB is number 1, 6600 is #6
On bestbuy trhe 8GB 7600 is number 2, the 6GB 3050 is number 4

Price it well, and it would sell I think, the most played steam games right now are according to them

Counter strike 2
Dota 2
PUBG
Bongo cat
Rust
Apex legends
Banana
Marvel rivals
Clair obscur 33
GTA 5
Baldurs gates 3
REPO

All game that a 8GB gpu can play perfectly fine.

Or use 3GB memory modules and release the 12GB car when those are available in volume with full memory bus width.

 

[Lifelite]

Don't tease me bro. 17m30s or so for the memory lane bit. Time linked below...should be anyway.


View: https://youtu.be/AiekGcwaIho?t=1053

Ah I thought I linked it with timestamp. My B.

 

[Perilous]

Nvidia still out here treating their consumer customer base like trash still. How many times do they have to say they only want to serve business clients.

 

[Lifelite]

Nvidia still out here treating their consumer customer base like trash still. How many times do they have to say they only want to serve business clients.

Hasn't that been the trend everywhere, and it doesn't usually work.

Take E3 for example; It used to be very consumer based. Majority was normal people and fans of the industry having a blast seeing what's up and coming in their favorite hobby, and most of the presentations were aimed towards consumers and fans. Over time it started becoming aimed at journalists and investors, not even allowing the public to attend. That's how it died.

NVidia is just the latest example of how the investors replace the consumers as the real customers.

 

[OKC Yeakey Trentadue]

Testing Games compared the 5060 to the 4060. The performance differnce is nearly exact going from a 4060 to a 4060ti.

I'm really interested in the 5060 if they can make it in an Low Profile design. I really dont need to play the newest Doom game or whatever. The last 3 games I bought from Steam were RDR 2, Split Fiction, and It Takes 2. None of them need close to 8GB vram to play well. I would just like something with a bit more punch than my 3050 6GB.