Nvidia tried to bury early reviews of the 8GB RTX 5060 Ti, but now the truth is out–and it’s not pretty. With outdated specs and poor value,.
Nvidia succeeded in delaying reviews of their 8GB RTX 5060 Ti, but they couldn’t hide them forever. After about a week’s delay, we can show you just how underwhelming this product really is.
In case you missed it, Nvidia launched the GeForce RTX 5060 Ti last week, available in both 8GB and 16GB configurations. Leading up to this release, we learned that Nvidia was actively holding back the 8GB model from reviews. This meant it wouldn’t appear in initial coverage but would still be available for purchase when reviews went live – or shortly thereafter – which is exactly what happened.
We picked up the Asus Prime model for $720 AUD, currently the most affordable RTX 5060 Ti in stock. The most affordable 16GB model at the time was the MSI Ventus 2X for $880, a 22% premium. The issue is that both the 8GB and 16GB versions are branded simply as RTX 5060 Ti. While the GPU configuration is identical, the difference in memory capacity makes them fundamentally different products.
8GB of VRAM in 2025 for a GPU as fast as the RTX 5060 Ti – which, to be fair, isn’t exactly impressive in terms of performance per dollar – is still too little memory for what this class of GPU is expected to handle. There are countless real-world scenarios where the RTX 5060 Ti will suffer severely, or even become unusable, due to the limited 8GB frame buffer. We’re going to explore a few of those cases today.
The core problem with a product like the RTX 5060 Ti is that many buyers will base their expectations on the performance of the 16GB model, only to choose the cheapest version available – which will often be the 8GB model. That results in people unknowingly buying a product that is arguably already obsolete.
To be clear, 8GB of VRAM is still enough for the majority of games today, and in many cases where it’s not, lowering the visual settings can still provide a playable experience.
However, it’s no longer sufficient for an optimal experience in many of the latest titles – and this situation is only going to deteriorate over the next few years. Most people buying a GeForce 50-series graphics card right now, especially something like the RTX 5060 Ti, are likely planning to use it for at least the next three years, if not longer. We don’t even want to imagine how poorly 8GB cards will perform by then. It’ll likely mirror what we’re currently seeing with 4GB GPUs.
And let’s be honest: when spending over $400, do you really want to be constantly worrying about VRAM? Tweaking settings just to squeeze under the memory cap shouldn’t be necessary at this price point. That’s a compromised and frustrating experience. The 8GB model is supposed to have an MSRP of $380, but the lowest listing we’ve found on Newegg is $420, with most models priced at $440 or higher.
Meanwhile, 16GB models start at $430, though many go for $480 or more. Even in the worst-case scenario, you’re looking at only a 14% premium for double the memory. That makes the 8GB model a serious trap for buyers unaware that two distinct versions of the same product exist.
The point is, there should never have been an 8GB version of the RTX 5060 Ti, and Nvidia knows it. They know this is a weak product. They know that 8GB of VRAM in 2025 is far from adequate. And they also know that many of you know this. But they also know they can make a lot of money from it, because many gamers aren’t tech-savvy and will just buy the cheapest option. They’re also counting on the pre-built PC market.
By selling people a product that’s already outdated, Nvidia ensures they’ll return sooner than they otherwise would – whether for the next generation or even a mid-cycle refresh. We’ve been saying it for years: this is planned obsolescence. And if you can’t see it now, well you’re Nvidia’s favorite type of customer.
This review takes a different approach from our usual lineup of blue bar graphs, performance summaries, and cost-per-frame evaluations. To highlight just how poorly the 8GB RTX 5060 Ti performs in 2025, we purchased one and spent several days running extensive side-by-side tests.
In the graphs, you’ll find data such as average frame rate, 1% low FPS, VRAM usage, and frametime graphs that highlight stuttering and frame pacing issues. These issues are easier to showcase in the video version of this review if you want to check that out.
For all of this testing, we’re using a PCIe 5.0-enabled AM5 system with the 9800X3D and 32GB of DDR5-6000 CL30 memory. This setup is essentially a best-case scenario for running over the VRAM buffer with an RTX 5060 Ti. Performance will be worse on PCIe 4.0 systems, and drastically worse on PCIe 3.0.
4K DLSS Quality, Very High Preset
We’ll start with The Last of Us Part II, running at 4K. Now, you might think 4K is a questionable choice for a product like this, but we’d argue otherwise for a few reasons. Firstly, the RTX 5060 Ti is capable of 4K gaming – especially with upscaling like DLSS set to quality mode. Secondly, high-quality 4K high refresh rate monitors now cost less than the RTX 5060 Ti itself and can deliver a truly stunning visual experience.
The key takeaway here is that the 16GB card averaged 68 fps, while the 8GB model barely surpassed 30 fps, with frequent frametime spikes. By the end of our test, the 16GB version delivered 120% better 1% low performance – a massive difference. We know some will dismiss 4K results, so let’s move to 1440p.
1440p DLSS Quality, Very High Preset
Performance does improve for the 8GB model at 1440p, but it still suffers from severe frametime issues. Meanwhile, the 16GB card delivers frame rates around 30% higher. We’re using the Asus Prime model for both versions, and while the 16GB card clocks about 1% higher, that minor difference doesn’t explain the performance gap. By the end of testing, the 16GB version was 34% faster on average and delivered 215% better 1% lows.
1440p DLSS Quality, Very High Preset + Frame Generation
Frame generation has been a major selling point for both the GeForce 40 and 50 series. But when enabled, the additional VRAM requirements severely affect the 8GB model, dropping 1% lows into the single digits – making for a truly poor experience.
1440p DLSS Quality, High Preset
What if we drop down to the High preset? At 1440p with DLSS enabled, we encounter occasional stutters on the 8GB card, but overall performance is acceptable. Still, the 16GB card maintains a clear lead – 18% faster on average, with 35% better 1% lows.
1440p DLSS Quality, Medium Preset
Switching to the Medium preset cleans up frame pacing for the 8GB model, making the experience smoother. Even then, the 16GB model still delivers 12% higher average performance and 11% better 1% lows.
1440p DLSS Quality, Low Preset
Even with the Low preset, the 16GB version remains 8% faster on average. It’s not a huge difference, but still surprising to see any gain considering we’re nearing the absolute limit of the 8GB card’s capability.
1080p Native, Very High Preset
At native 1080p using the Very High preset, the game demands over 9GB of VRAM. This causes the 8GB model to struggle significantly, with terrible frametime performance – even at this lower resolution.
