this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Hardware

33 readers
1 users here now

A place for quality hardware news, reviews, and intelligent discussion.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (7 children)

Nope, again just priced badly. All of the Ada Lovlace chips are efficient and performant for what they are.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (6 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

4060 Ti is objectively a bad product.

3060 Ti is literally better.

it literally is not, 4060 Ti is 11% faster at 1080p, 9% faster at 1440p, and 6% faster at 2160p.

the reduced memory bandwidth is already baked into these performance figures, and apart from some edge-cases like emulated PS3/wii at 16K resolution the 4060 Ti is still generally a faster card. not that much faster, but, it's not slower either.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

4060 Ti has 128-bit bus width, meaning it will age poorly in the long term. 4060 was designed to be planned obsolescence.

3060 Ti will last you longer as future games will demand more memory bandwidth.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

that's what I said, the memory bandwidth is already baked into the numbers you see. the cache increases mean that you don't need as much actual memory bandwidth - it's the same thing AMD did with RDNA2.

AMD reduced the memory bus by 25% on the 6700XT relative to its predecessor and 33% on the 6600XT relative to its predecessor, so, if you think that will cause those cards to age more poorly...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

RDNA 2 is dogshit as well, lmao. I'm not defending them either.

The cache increase didn't do shit since the previous generation Ampere performs better at 4K than Ada Lovelace.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)