NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB

[W1zzard]

Finally! Our GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB review is live. We're investigating what performance gains you can expect from doubling the VRAM size to 16 GB. Our review of the 16 GB version also looks at power consumption and how overclocking is affected by the additional four memory chips on the back side of the PCB.

Show full review

 

[Somebodyidk]

I'd buy it. At 269$ that is.

 

[AusWolf]

So much for games needing more than 8 GB VRAM. In 4K with RT on, perhaps.

 

[lemonadesoda]

Thanks for the review!

 

[bug]

I wasn't expecting RT to be the sole area where games would actually use more than 8GB. I knew RT eats additional VRAM, but still...

 

[AnotherReader]

Thanks for the review. It's nice to see you corroborate the performance increase in "The Last of Us part I". The idle power consumption suggest that 4 GDDR6 devices consume about 7 W of power.

 

[Avro Arrow]

It's like I said, if you thought that the review for the RTX 4060 Ti 8GB was the worst that you've ever seen (and it certainly was the worst that I can remember), just wait, because the 16GB review will be even worse.

Sure enough...

I swear man, the ones in charge over at nVidia must be smoking moon rocks because putting this card up against the RX 6800 XT is asking for a Romulan Bloodbath (green blood will flow).

 

[Luke357]

Should have been a 12G card with a 192 bit bus the entire time. This generation will probably go down in history as one of the worst. Nvidia and AMD are milking everyone and it's pathetic. I'm glad I got my 3080 Ti when I did because I'd have to wait another 2 years for something decent.

 

[samum]

"it does look a little bit plasticky, like a $199 card from not that long ago"

That's because the 4060 Ti would have been a $199 card not that long ago.

 

[AusWolf]

I wasn't expecting RT to be the sole area where games would actually use more than 8GB. I knew RT eats additional VRAM, but still...

It just proves that using more than 8 GB when more is available, and needing more than 8 GB are entirely different things.

 

[mahoney]

It's the same shit as with the 960 2gb vs 4gb and the 270x 2gb vs 4gb.

 

[AusWolf]

It's the same shit as with the 960 2gb vs 4gb and the 270x 2gb vs 4gb.

I don't think so. There were cases when the extra 2 GB helped the 960 with stutters a lot, but the 4060 Ti is already GPU limited in those cases when the extra VRAM could come in handy (in 4K with RT in some heavy games).

 

[AnotherReader]

It just proves that using more than 8 GB when more is available, and needing more than 8 GB are entirely different things.

In all of the games tested, "The Last of Us" is the only one that shows any significant performance difference between the 16 GB card and its less well-endowed sibling.

 

[Gmr_Chick]

@W1zzard the GOAT for buying this card out of his own pocket in order to provide us here at TPU with a review!

 

[mahoney]

I don't think so. There were cases when the extra 2 GB helped the 960 with stutters a lot, but the 4060 Ti is already GPU limited in those cases when the extra VRAM could come in handy (in 4K with RT in some heavy games).

in 2014? no way. People were so braindead on the 4gb of vram schtick they were buying these gpu's instead of going for a 280x which at one point was cheaper than the 960 4gb model and at least 20% faster.

 

[Bomby569]

the influencers wanted more vram in this card, they got more vram in this card. Someone must be happy and they are the only ones.

 

[ARF]

So much for games needing more than 8 GB VRAM. In 4K with RT on, perhaps.

The review doesn't paint the whole picture. It is either the chip itself is so slow, that it can not use more than 8 GB, or that nvidia cheats and automatically modifies the image quality in order to fit in the available VRAM buffer.

There is a difference if you know where to look at.

 

[Mr. Perfect]

Thank you for going out of your way to get one of these to test!

If the price wasn't so crazy, it might be a more future proof purchase. As it is, I'll call it a nice try.

Nice Try

• It is given to a product that attempted to respond to market conditions or fill a hole in a product lineup, but didn't quite achieve that goal
• This does not mean that product is bad, but rather it didn't fix the problem it was meant to solve
• May be combined with the "Great Value", "Innovation" or "But Expensive" awards
• Cannot be combined with "Editor's Choice" or "Recommended"

 

[lemonadesoda]

The 16GB is significantly helping 8k RT DLSS. ;p

from slideshow to doublespeed slideshow

 

[THU31]

8 GB is perfectly fine for 1080p. Some games are just unoptimized garbage.

You need 12 GB for 1440p, but this card is too slow for 1440p because of the 128-bit bus.

Pricing is one problem of this generation, but the memory subsystem is another, a way more significant one imo. Every card below the 4090 should have additional 64-bit and the extra 4 GB of VRAM.

4060 (Ti) - 12 GB with 192-bit
4070 (Ti) - 16 GB with 256-bit
4080 - 20 GB with 320-bit

Same core configs for every chip, just the additional memory channels and modules. Current pricing would be fine with those specs.

 

[ARF]

8 GB is perfectly fine for 1080p. Some games are just unoptimized garbage.

The problem is in nvidia, not in the games. Because nvidia wants to cut costs from everything - and you get significantly lower quality product for much higher price.

RTX 4060 Ti is on par with the 11 GB RTX 2080 Ti which is the first GPU considered by TPU as 4K READY!

 

[cbb]

buncha folks above saying "see this proves 16GB isn't needed!"...isn't it more that 16GB is wasted on this card given the very limited bandwidth for access said memory plus a low-mid gpu? putting 16GB on an old S3 or Voodo dgp prolly wouldn't do much either, to make an even more obvious (and absurdly extreme; I picked it for humor rly) example

I'm not super crazy about amd's products (especially so far this gen), but their memory allocations by tier seem closer to what I'd prefer? e.g. default of 16 on the 7's and 8s. This 16gb x60 is just silly and seems intended mostly to generate FUD to argue against more memory across the rest of their product line, to me. idk.

 

[Vayra86]

It just proves that using more than 8 GB when more is available, and needing more than 8 GB are entirely different things.

No it proves the 4060ti is shit no matter what VRAM capacity it has because both 8 and 16GB are hamstrung by bottom tier bandwidth. Memory is not just capacity.

The better half of the Ada stack is a pointless release beyond the power efficiency gains compared to Ampere - and that only happened because Ampere is bottom tier efficiency to begin with. While having much better bandwidth.

x70/ti is going to suffer a similar fate 2-3 years down the line. Ada is lazy, badly positioned and grossly overpriced for what is a tiny die and ditto systems to support it.

Every badly balanced GPU is going to get killed by its weakest link.

 

[THU31]

RTX 4060 Ti is on par with the 11 GB RTX 2080 Ti which is the first GPU considered by TPU as 4K READY!

View attachment 306117

Well you can play games from 2018 in 4K on the 4060 Ti, with 8% lower performance, but still.

Not sure what your argument is. Are you saying that if a card from 2018 was called 4K ready, the same level of performance should be 4K ready five years later? It has never worked like that. Games get better looking and more demanding over time.

System requirements have to be justified, though. There's absolutely nothing special about those games that are struggling with 8GB. There are other games that look on par or better and have no problems. Cyberpunk with RT Overdrive has no issues with 8 GB, and from a purely technical perspective that looks better than any other game.


Yes, NVIDIA is greedy. They're cutting costs while increasing prices. But that doesn't take away responsibility from developers to optimize games for hardware that is currently on the market. If developers say "we're tired of optimizing for 8 GB", I don't feel like they deserve my money.

 

[EatingDirt]

So much for games needing more than 8 GB VRAM. In 4K with RT on, perhaps.

Most of the games in the benchmark suite don't need more than 8GB. If you're playing at 1080p, sure, you basically see no difference, but at 1440p there are a few good examples of the inadequacy of 8GB:

The Last of Us is 18% faster.
F1 2023 sees a ~5% uplift.
Doom sees a ~3% uplift at 1440p.

It's not going to get better.

At the price the 8GB is at, it's already a bad product at it's price. This one is even worse because Nvidia decided 8GB more ram, and nothing else was somehow worth $100 more on an already abysmal product.