- Nov 21, 2018
- 20,078
- 868
- 2,860
News Nvidia RTX 3060 (12GB) Coming in Feb for $329
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
Why is the 3060ti at 8gb for$399 and the 3060 base at 12gb for $329?
Because the 3060 Ti has more GPU cores and is thus faster. I'm guessing there will be a 6GB ($299?) 3060 as well, and at some point we'll see 16GB 3060 Ti / 3070 cards maybe. Basically, 6GB really isn't enough for a new mainstream card, so Nvidia did the right thing and moved it to 12GB. Why didn't it do 16GB on the 3060 Ti and 3070? Cost reasons. Same for 20GB on 3080.
bigdragon
Distinguished
- Oct 19, 2011
- 1,111
- 553
- 20,160
I hope the reason why stock drops of the 3080 and 3070 have become so rare is because production has shifted over to Super or Ti versions. Some of us play games at 4k, 1440p, or in VR and need the extra VRAM.
Seeing a 12 GB 3060 is a positive, but it does make the rest of Nvidia's lineup look absolutely anemic now. I'm particularly surprised that the normal 3060 has more VRAM than the 3060 Ti.
Seeing a 12 GB 3060 is a positive, but it does make the rest of Nvidia's lineup look absolutely anemic now. I'm particularly surprised that the normal 3060 has more VRAM than the 3060 Ti.
No reason Nvidia can't do a 16GB 3060 Ti as well. Or whatever name it wants to use. Will it do that, though? That's the question.
spongiemaster
Admirable
- Dec 12, 2019
- 2,276
- 1,280
- 7,560
No 6GB version was announced, so no, they can't do that. The bigger issue is that only FE models sell at base MSRP while AIB's almost never have base MSRP versions despite releasing a dozen different models each. That's not on NVidia, AIB's do the same thing on the AMD side.
Why_Me
Polypheme
- Jan 17, 2008
- 16,352
- 2,336
- 69,840
I was hoping the 3050 and 3050 Ti would be announced today along with that 3060 12gb.
https://www.techradar.com/news/nvidia-rtx-3050-rtx-3050-ti-and-rtx-3060-might-debut-at-ces-next-week
https://www.techradar.com/news/nvidia-rtx-3050-rtx-3050-ti-and-rtx-3060-might-debut-at-ces-next-week
Chung Leong
Reputable
- Dec 6, 2019
- 493
- 193
- 4,860
How useful is the extra VRAM though given the bandwidth constraint? At 384GB/s it would take 0.03s to transfer 12GB. That isn't anywhere near enough for acceptable frame-rate. I suppose it could act as a buffer on lower-end systems incapable of streaming texture on-demand due to SATA drives and/or limited system RAM.
LolaGT
Reputable
- Oct 31, 2020
- 276
- 248
- 5,090
We are in a perfect storm for scarcity in the GPU market, same with most enthusiast PC parts. The pandemic leaves a lot of folks sitting at home, and most of those people realized a 1000 dollar iphone is pretty worthless when you are on the sofa day in day out, and you can't really game on it.
The once recently proclaimed dead PC desktop saw a revival, and with the market built for pre-pandemic times they got caught out with high demand.
They weren't ready.
This isn't going to be fixed for months. The problem is not the bots, the problem is availability and demand. The problem is us, anyone who is willing to cough up the profiteering prices.
That 3060 isn't going to sell for $329, no one will be finding any at $429, it is a joke and disingenuous to even make the msrp claim.
The once recently proclaimed dead PC desktop saw a revival, and with the market built for pre-pandemic times they got caught out with high demand.
They weren't ready.
This isn't going to be fixed for months. The problem is not the bots, the problem is availability and demand. The problem is us, anyone who is willing to cough up the profiteering prices.
That 3060 isn't going to sell for $329, no one will be finding any at $429, it is a joke and disingenuous to even make the msrp claim.
It's more about the capacity and all the various parts of the GPU that can ask for data. Some of it will be satisfied by the caches, and what isn't goes to the VRAM -- and if it's not in VRAM, the data has to come over PCIe from system RAM. What's the real-world throughput of the VRAM? I doubt it's actually 384 GBps -- that's the best-case burst speed. The bigger problem if you don't have enough VRAM is that if stuff has to come over the PCIe bus, it's a fraction of the throughput (16 GBps peak for PCIe 3.0 -- technically 15.75 GBps).
Anyway, if a game routinely makes use of textures and other data that uses something like 10GB of VRAM, the 12GB will probably end up being 30-50 percent better performance relative to the same GPU with 6GB VRAM. Give or take. In extreme cases, it can be even worse.
A good example of what happens when you don't have enough VRAM is to look at the 4GB and 8GB RX 5500 XT. At 1080p and medium settings, the two GPUs are effectively tied (the 8GB card is less than 2% faster overall). At 1440p medium, the 8GB card is 4% faster, and 9% faster at 4K medium. Bump up to 1080p ultra, however, and even at 1080p the 8GB card has a 12% advantage -- again, overall, across nine games. At 1440p ultra, it's a 17% lead, and at 4K ultra it's 26% faster.
Looking at the individual results, Borderlands 3 and The Division 2 both show a 30-50% advantage for the 8GB card at 1440p/4K ultra. And of course, neither GPU is really running at high performance at 1440p/4K ultra -- 40 fps for the 8GB at 1440p, vs. 27-30 fps on the 4GB; and 19-22 fps at 4K for 8GB vs. 12-14 fps on 4GB. But even a lighter game like Forza Horizon 4 shows a benefit of around 30% at 1080p/1440p/4K ultra, and the same goes for Far Cry 5.
So best-case, with double the VRAM your performance could potentially improve by 50 percent, but overall a 20-30 percent increase is more likely. That's if a game can use nearly all of the extra VRAM, because caching and other tech is designed to ensure a GPU doesn't choke when some app wants to use more VRAM than what's available. Worst-case, the extra VRAM shouldn't be any slower (1-2 percent margin of error differences). Here's all the 5500 XT data from my testing:
- Mar 16, 2013
- 171,278
- 17,808
- 184,590
So you're telling me I can't sell my 1959 era train set for more than the purchase price was?
You can't define "scalping" closely enough to work for only GPUs in this particular instance.
We should pass laws to make things that we don't like illegal! That will solve all of our problems. /s
A close corollary to this is that we should also pass more laws to make things that are illegal more illegal! Genius.
bigdragon
Distinguished
- Oct 19, 2011
- 1,111
- 553
- 20,160
I think this would be a good idea if and only if it were tailored to new-release, high-demand products that are vulnerable to market manipulation. The law would need to be crafted to have a time expiration following release of a new product. Maximum 5% over MSRP for the first 4 months should be specific enough to combat the problem. We don't want manufacturers to be in total, perpetual control of the price. We have anti-scalping and anti-gouging laws for other products so there's no reason why the US government can't do something helpful here.
Unfortunately, such a law reigning in scalping would quickly be challenged by the scalper-enablers. Amazon and Newegg can both get a double cut of high-demand products by selling them to scalpers, and then again handling the transaction between scalper and actual consumer. The problem isn't limited to Ebay.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Microphone buzzing stops when pc case is touched- Started by ognjenzzz
- Replies: 2
-
-
Discussion Can graphics cards with external PCIE power connectors run off of just the power from the PCIE slot?- Started by Order 66
- Replies: 15
-
Question Is recommended format a new ssd (about security) before install windows?
- Started by Tams_Hardware
- Replies: 2
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram