Nvidia is reportedly readying a yet another GeForce RTX 4060 model, the non-Ti RTX 4060 with 16GB of memory. The new GeForce RTX 4060 variant will reportedly feature a slightly higher power rating than the variant with 8GB of memory, reports VideoCardz.
Earlier this week it transpired (albeit from an unofficial source) that Nvidia was prepping three GeForce RTX 4060 models: the GeForce RTX 4060 8GB, GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB, and GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB. But it now looks like there will be the fourth model too: the GeForce RTX 4060 with 16GB of memory, if the information is accurate. All four potential SKUs are certain candidates to join the ranks of the best graphics cards
The interesting part is that VideoCardz clams that the GeForce RTX 4060 16GB will feature the AD106-351 graphics processor. Meanwhile the GeForce RTX 4060 8GB is expected to use the AD106-350, so a slightly different variant. Both will likely feature 3072 CUDA cores and a 128-bit memory interface, so the difference between the two is unclear.
Another interesting peculiarity of the GeForce RTX 4060 16GB noted by VideoCardz is the fact that the 16GB card will be rated for a 165W TGP, as opposed to 160W for the 8GB version.
While it is unclear why the GeForce RTX 4060 16GB has a higher TGP rating and carries a differently market GPU, the very fact that Nvidia is reportedly prepping a GeForce RTX 4060 (non-Ti) model with 16GB of memory is important and pretty much remarkable.
|Row 0 - Cell 0||GPU||FP32 CUDA Cores||Memory Configuration||TBP||MSRP|
|GeForce RTX 4090 Ti||AD102||18176 (?)||24GB 384-bit 24 GT/s GDDR6X (?)||600W (?)||?|
|GeForce RTX 4090||AD102||16384||24GB 384-bit 21 GT/s GDDR6X||450W||$1,599|
|GeForce RTX 4080||AD103||9728||16GB 256-bit 22.4 GT/s GDDR6X||320W||$1,199|
|GeForce RTX 4070 Ti||AD104||7680||12GB 192-bit 21 GT/s GDDR6X||285W||$799|
|GeForce RTX 4070||AD104||5888||12GB 192-bit 21 GT/s GDDR6X||200W||$599|
|GeForce RTX 4060 Ti*||AD106||4352 (?)||8GB or 16GB 128-bit 18 GT/s GDDR6 (?)||160W (?)||sub-$500|
|GeForce RTX 4060*||AD106||3072 (?)||8GB 128-bit GDDR6||?||sub-$400 (?)|
*Rumored specs, not confirmed by Nvidia
What remains to be seen is how Nvidia positions its GeForce RTX 4060 16GB variant. It is reasonable to expect this model to sit above the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB (which is projected to hit the market this month), but we can only wonder how this SKU will stack against the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB.
If the two variants are close in terms of price, then gamers will have to make their choice based on whether their favorite games need 16GB of memory, or a higher-performing GPU with 4352 CUDA cores. Or perhaps go with more expensive GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB or even GeForce RTX 4070 with 12GB.
Your article is misleading. Nvidia is NOT prepping a 16GB non-TI variant. It's just that the 16 GB RTX 4060 Ti has a different PCB and board design.
Please read Vidoecardz's article again. They are talking about the Ti SKU, not non-Ti.
They got hold of the 16GB specs for the graphics card and it looks exactly the same as the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB.
We are getting a slightly different AD103-351 GPU that will be fitted on the PG190 SKU 363/361 board. AD106-350 GPU is being used by the 8GB SKU.
As usual this new GPU will house 34 SMs with 4352 cores, 32 MB of L2 cache, and a 128-bit bus interface that supports 16 GB memory at speeds of 18 Gbps for up to 288 GB/s bandwidth.
While the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB graphics card retains the same chip, it looks like the dual-density memory modules will require a little bit more power. The standard 8 GB model has a TDP of 160W and the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB will operate with a reference 165W TDP.
Long time ago the graphics have 384 bit bus in extreme some graphics achieved 512 bits. But today give to you a 128 bits and says banana to you.
I'm sorry, but things just get shadier and shadier around here as time goes on. Editors need to vet articles better than this.
Why don't they proof-read the articles before publishing it online though ? I think the article has still not been looked into or edited in any form. It is HIGHLY misleading to say the least.