MSI Benchmarks Show NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16 GB) Performing Slightly Worse Than 8 GB Model In Cyberpunk 2077 and Other Games

The FPS Review may receive a commission if you purchase something after clicking a link in this article.

Image: NVIDIA

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16 GB) costs $100 more than the 8 GB version, so it’s got to be faster, right? Maybe not, as MSI has shared a set of benchmarks that show the latest Ada Lovelace GPU delivering worse performance than its lower-capacity sibling in some of today’s most popular games, including Cyberpunk 2077 and F1 2023. NVIDIA officially launched the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (16 GB) yesterday, but the company didn’t devote much to the event, only giving it a paragraph at the end of an article detailing the new Game Ready Driver for Portal: Prelude RTX and Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart.

Starting this month, our graphics card partners, including ASUS, Colorful, Gainward, Galax, Gigabyte, INNO3D, MSI, Palit, PNY and Zotac will begin offering 16GB versions of the card. In most games, both versions of the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (8GB and 16GB) will deliver the same level of performance, because the specs are otherwise identical. There are a handful of games which play best at “High” settings presets on the RTX 4060 Ti (8GB), and “Ultra” settings on the RTX 4060 Ti (16GB). Today’s driver supports the new 16GB versions.

Image: MSI

Join the discussion in The FPS Review Forums...

Discussion (6 replies)

Join Discussion →
U
Uvilla 👍 2

Compression/ data saving ( hence less processing) used in 8 gb and not 16gb?

A
Armenius 👍 1

Looks like it is within the margin of error, to me. Not every benchmark will be exactly the same. I wouldn't expect it to run any better than the 8GB model either way.

MadMummy76
MadMummy76 👍 1

It should be tested with games and settings that require more than 8GB VRAM otherwise what is the point? It's like expecting your car to go faster if you put a full tank instead of half a tank of petrol in it.

A

"MadMummy76, post: 74067, member: 1298" wrote:

It should be tested with games and settings that require more than 8GB VRAM otherwise what is the point? It's like expecting your car to go faster if you put a full tank instead of half a tank of petrol in it.


It doesn't matter because people were loudly declaring that 8GB wasn't enough for 1920x1080 anymore despite that being wrong. The 4060 is made for that resolution.

MadMummy76
MadMummy76 👍 1

"Armenius, post: 74069, member: 180" wrote:

It doesn't matter because people were loudly declaring that 8GB wasn't enough for 1920x1080 anymore despite that being wrong. The 4060 is made for that resolution.


Not being enough doesn't mean all games, only certain new ones with all the bling enabled. Why would you expect CS:GO to suddenly need more than 8GB now? Of all the games to test the difference that is probably the stupidest choice. The only game on the list that could maybe benefit from more than 8GB on certain settings is Hogwarts Legacy, which curiously missing the numbers on the picture.

Grimlakin
Grimlakin

It's the perception that matters. If folks THINK that card will last them longer and for higher resolution gaming.... then they will spend the extra. "16 is mobiggen than 8 Maude."

And SOME titles need more video memory... show me a comparison using Diablo 4 with max settings even at 1080p.

Tsing Mui
News poster at The FPS Review.

Recent News