News Nvidia RTX 5060 Ti final specs and launch day allegedly leaked

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
hotaru251 said:
and like the 4060 its an instant "don't buy".

theres no world where that 128bit bus will not be holding you back same way the 4060 did.
Click to expand...
There is such a world: The world where it's using GDDR7 for a large bandwidth boost.

That being said, I don't think the 5060 Ti will be a game changer because of the shader count barely increasing. The 5060 gets a relatively large uplift from the 4060, so if they eventually sell a 12 GB version, that could be good at the right price.
 
usertests said:
There is such a world: The world where it's using GDDR7 for a large bandwidth boost.

That being said, I don't think the 5060 Ti will be a game changer because of the shader count barely increasing. The 5060 gets a relatively large uplift from the 4060, so if they eventually sell a 12 GB version, that could be good at the right price.
Click to expand...

5.8% increase in CUDA cores.
If they use 28GT/s GDDR7 then we are looking at 448GB/s of bandwidth... Which is an increase of 160GB/s or an improvement of 64% in effective bandwidth.

Core clocks haven't shifted much between the 4000 series and 5000 series, but that will likely be what determines the uplift in compute-bound scenarios gen-on-gen.

nVidia might also just ignore the option of going with GDDR7 and stick with GDDR6 like AMD as it's cheaper.
 
It looks like they photoshopped the 12VHPWR connector out of the provided image. Unfortunately that is probably how this will work and it is unlikely that Nvidia has fixed their power delivery on lower end models, but not on the higher end models.
 
I held my nose and bought an RTX 5070, since my old RTX 2060 6GB was just not good enough for modern games (it didn't even meet minimum requirements for Indiana Jones and the Great Circle). Even though it was very expensive (~$600ish), the RTX 5070 is a solid upgrade. I quickly ran Time Spy before and after upgrading to see the difference (the rest of the system is the same):
RTX 2060 Time Spy: 7712 (GPU: 7435)
RTX 5070 Time Spy: 18619 (GPU: 22559)
So this new GPU I guess is ~3x as fast as what I had at least in synthetic benchmarks.
 
RTX 5060 to will probably be slightly faster than a 4060 ti, which started at $400.

So I fully expect the fictional MSRP of the 5060 ti to start at $500, with actual cards starting at $600, and a street price that won't matter, because it's a paper launch.

But the street price of the RTX 4060 ti will shoot up a lot once scalpers cartels finish up buying the last of the remaining stock of every Nvidia card of every generation, on earth.
I think the actual Mafia is involved with manipulating GPU prices at this point.
 
Giroro said:
RTX 5060 to will probably be slightly faster than a 4060 ti, which started at $400.

So I fully expect the fictional MSRP of the 5060 ti to start at $500, with actual cards starting at $600, and a street price that won't matter, because it's a paper launch.

But the street price of the RTX 4060 ti will shoot up a lot once scalpers cartels finish up buying the last of the remaining stock of every Nvidia card of every generation, on earth.
I think the actual Mafia is involved with manipulating GPU prices at this point.
Click to expand...
Totally agree with this except for the mafia part (I don’t think NVidia would allow them on their turf).

Every 50 series except the 5090 is just a very slightly faster version of the 40 series, non of the 50 series are for sale in any reasonable number and aside from the two or three founders edition cards NVidia sells monthly non are for sale at anything even close to resembling MSRP.
 
hotaru251 said:
and like the 4060 its an instant "don't buy".

theres no world where that 128bit bus will not be holding you back same way the 4060 did.
Click to expand...
The bus on the 4060 was irrelevant. There simply wasn't enough compute to leverage the bandwidth that existed. Also, massive cache changes in Lovelace made VRAM bandwidth nowhere near as relevant as it used to be.

The 5060 (non-Ti) is the product to watch; finally a "low-end" product that will displace a 3070. (I'm calculating it will be a near-match to the 3070)

The 5060Ti will be "OK", probably a bit better than a 3070Ti, but it will be overpriced for the performance you gain over the 5060.
 
Last edited:
Putting aside the overall tortured language in this article, it's obvious that a 5060Ti is not going to be only $50 less than a 5070. The 4060Ti 16GB was a sales disaster, price is everything in the mainstream and it was simply too expensive.

Expect the 5060Ti 16GB to drop to $449 and the 8GB to remain at $399. The 5060 will also remain at $299, unless the 9060 series is exceptionally fast and competitively priced.
 
nitrium said:
I held my nose and bought an RTX 5070, since my old RTX 2060 6GB was just not good enough for modern games (it didn't even meet minimum requirements for Indiana Jones and the Great Circle). Even though it was very expensive (~$600ish), the RTX 5070 is a solid upgrade. I quickly ran Time Spy before and after upgrading to see the difference (the rest of the system is the same):
RTX 2060 Time Spy: 7712 (GPU: 7435)
RTX 5070 Time Spy: 18619 (GPU: 22559)
So this new GPU I guess is ~3x as fast as what I had at least in synthetic benchmarks.
Click to expand...
You just had to drop $50 more to get the 9070XT and get 5-6x the performance.
 
Why would they possibly announce and produce a 16GB 5060 Ti when the the 5070 only has 12 GB? I realize there are a lot of variables that affect performance. But I don't understand why they'd do this.
 
SteveRNG said:
Why would they possibly announce and produce a 16GB 5060 Ti when the the 5070 only has 12 GB? I realize there are a lot of variables that affect performance. But I don't understand why they'd do this.
Click to expand...
1) Bigger number sells
2) Not everything is about the GPU performance, for some users the 16GB VRAM is actually the point of the card

You could say the exact same thing about the 4060 TI 16GB, you could say why don't they make a 24GB 5070, and all sorts of things. Market segmentation mostly. They don't want people to not buy the 5070 Ti and 5080, so they don't make a high VRAM count card, and they don't want a card that competes directly with the 4090/5090.

Large VRAM cards will also eat into their workstation card sales, which do tend to have the larger memory pools.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveRNG
Eximo said:
1) Bigger number sells
2) Not everything is about the GPU performance, for some users the 16GB VRAM is actually the point of the card

You could say the exact same thing about the 4060 TI 16GB, you could say why don't they make a 24GB 5070, and all sorts of things. Market segmentation mostly. They don't want people to not buy the 5070 Ti and 5080, so they don't make a high VRAM count card, and they don't want a card that competes directly with the 4090/5090.

Large VRAM cards will also eat into their workstation card sales, which do tend to have the larger memory pools.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the response. I just assume that in certain situations, the 16 GB 5060 Ti could perform better than the 12 GB 5070 (poorly optimized games and future games). But if I'm being honest, I didn't think to see how the 4060 Ti compared to the 5070. ... so maybe memory bandwidth and <something> count is too low for a 5060 to perform better than a 5070 even if it has more VRAM. And with that, I'll go look at the 4060 Ti benchmarks. :)...
[edit] which shows that the 4060 Ti didn't perform anywhere near the 4070. Thanks again for the explanation!
 
That is enough VRAM bandwidth that the card will likely start to suffer from having 8GB of VRAM. nVidia hamstrung the 4060 Ti by limiting it's bandwidth to 128-bit GDDR6 at 288Gbps, making that the limiting factor over the cores or size. With the 5060 ti having significantly more bandwidth, the core and especially size are going to end up holding it back.
 
logainofhades said:
An 8gb graphics card in 2025 is DOA, imo, unless you are playing E-Sports type games, or older titles. 12gb should be the new minimum.
Click to expand...

It kinds depends on the game and settings. NVidia released the same card with two different memory configurations allowing for a real apples to apples comparison.

www.techspot.com

Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB Reviewed, Benchmarked

Despite our fondness for the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti, we can admit that just 8GB of VRAM is not enough for a $400 GPU in mid-2023. So...
www.techspot.com www.techspot.com

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-16gb-review

On modern OS's, Graphics VRAM is basically just a cache as all resources are loaded into and accessed from system memory. The framework attempts to identify which resources are needed and preloads them into graphics ram, and leaves them there until it runs out of space and has to flush them out. If that happens frequently then it'll cause jitter and become very noticeable, it's similar to if you need to flush and reload a cores cache due to a prediction fault. Buffers and working memory need to always be in VRAM, so they get priority with resources like textures getting what's left over. DLSS for example takes up over 1.5GB worth of VRAM by itself with MFG taking up even more. Taking the texture slider down from "ultra" to "high" usually fixes VRAM stuttering issues. It's going to be extremely sensitive to title and settings.

Having said that, the 5060 Ti doesn't look to be hamstrung like the 4060 Ti was, as such I expect it's capable of being pushed to higher settings which then become more memory demanding making that 8GB a serious issue. PCIe 5 is 128GB/s with dual channel DDR5 6000 at 96GB/s, 6400 would be 102.4 GB/s but why would someone pair up that memory with a 60 model card.
 
Last edited:
palladin9479 said:
It kinds depends on the game and settings. NVidia released the same care with two different memory configurations allowing for a real apples to apples comparison.
Click to expand...


Yea, I can get away with 8gb because all I play is WoW. For those chasing the AAA games, I just don't think 8gb is really going to cut it anymore, unless you are really happy with low details, which at that point, you may as well just go buy a console.
 
logainofhades said:
Yea, I can get away with 8gb because all I play is WoW. For those chasing the AAA games, I just don't think 8gb is really going to cut it anymore, unless you are really happy with low details, which at that point, you may as well just go buy a console.
Click to expand...
Read the techspot and toms articles, they are using modern games and not WoW. And it's not low details, it's high instead of ultra in some cases though ultra still works depending.


Totally remember playing DX12 games back on Win98.

iU56NYpa2WwEyJp8f4bzLK-970-80.png.webp


Cyberpunk 2077, was such a blast on DOS.

CP2077_1440p.png
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom