Carzy Zarx’s PC Gaming Emporium - Catch Up on All the Latest PC Gaming Related News

[JEMC]

numberwang said:

Bofferbrauer2 said:

It should beat at least the 3060Ti. I'm sure it will do so in 1080p, but I fear the 3060Ti will creep closer and closer the higher the resolution gets unless it's 6GB VRAM buffer runs out beforehand. And in games where 8GB are not enough, the 12GB of the 3060 could actually end up more important than the extra horsepower.

The AD107 of the 4060 is fundamentally a mobile GPU, being also used on the mobile 4060 and 4050. This also brings me to the one great quality of the card: the very low power draw for this day and age of just 115W TGP, which is great to see. You have to go back all the way to 2009 to the GeForce 9600 GT to find a xx6x card with a lower TDP (95W), though the 1660, 1060 and 960 are very close with their 120W TDP.

I wish the browser test had also included Opera, as the latter also includes it's own set of security features.

3060/ti has 8 GB of VRAM, same as 2060S. NVIDIA is not providing much upgrade for the 1080p gaming class this generation. Efficiency is not that important at below 200W GPUs. A bit of power limit and undervolting is getting you good efficiency already. A breakthrough in ray tracing performance (3x up) would have been nice.

I sorry to say that Nvidia's marketing team has deceived you. There are three (main) RTX 3060 cards out there.

The first 3060 we got was the 3060Ti, and it had 8GB of VRAM (full specs here), followed shortly after by the vanilla 3060 that has 12GB of VRAM (specs here). Yes, the lower-end card had more memory than the faster one. But it gets worse...

Late last year, maybe because Nvidia decided that repurposing faulty 3060 chips into 3050 cards wasn't profitable enough, they decided to launch a third RTX 3060 card (specs here), but with 8GB of memory and worse performance than the vanilla 3060 12GB one.