5060Ti 16GB vs 9060XT 16GB

[nheather]

Trying to choose between these two.

What I know already

• The 9060XT is cheaper, saving around £50-£60 when comparing cards at the same tier
• The 5060Ti is generally a little faster overall and has a bigger advantage with ray tracing

Would like to understand how much the 5060Ti is better and if they were closer in price which would you pick.

To be honest, I don’t really know what ray tracing is, I doubt I have ever had it turned on because my current and previous rigs have only been good for low/medium settings.

I also expect that either card will be more than my current needs which is 1080 gaming, though if/when I change my monitor I would like to move to 1440.

I’m also aware that my CPU is likely to become a bottleneck, it’s a Ryzen 3600 and my current GPU is 1660Ti which is the bottleneck at the moment. So I’m fully aware that I might need to move to 5xxx AM4 on my current motherboard or more like move to AM5 with a 7xxx.

As for money, I look at it this way, I could afford both, but that doesn’t mean that I want to spend unnecessarily. Before purchase it is more of a dilemma, it is an extra £60 which I could spend elsewhere but once I’ve purchased the price is soon forgotten.

 

[Gibbo]

9060 XT 16G is only £299 on OcUK, that is £100 cheaper, easy choice.

 

[Noughtboy]

I was in a similar dilemma. Also never knew what RT experience was and figured for my 1440p purposes and what I play, not an issue.

It helped that the 6090XT was significantly cheaper and also that at these level cards, the RT experience is very unlikely to be premium anyway.

I went for the 9060XT on launch. The prices now are a little different but likely still my recommendation.

 

[Armageus]

Would like to understand how much the 5060Ti is better and if they were closer in price which would you pick.

5060Ti is ~3% better - certainly not worth the extra, if you are able to get one of the 9060XT 16GB @ £299

The 9060XT is a great 1080P card, and will be decent enough for 1440P gaming with moderate settings or older games.

Performance
Averaged over our 2025 Q2 test suite, we're seeing pretty good numbers from the RX 9060 XT. At 1080p, Full HD, it is just 3% slower than the more expensive RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB. Compared to the RTX 5060 non-Ti, the performance uplift is a solid 11%. Once we up the resolution to 1440p, the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB is still 3% faster, but the 8 GB model drops a bit, and just matches the RX 9060 XT, the RTX 5060 is now 15% behind. Compared to last-generation's RX 7600 XT, the RX 9060 XT is 37% faster, 43% at 1440p. While I would definitely say that this is a 1080p card, 1440p is definitely in reach, certainly in older games, especially once you enable performance enhancing features like FSR 4 upscaling and frame generation. Some of the most demanding titles—and/or when RT is enabled—will require you to use FSR, too, to get a good gaming experience.

Sapphire Radeon RX 9060 XT Nitro+ OC Review - The Fastest RX 9060 XT

The Sapphire Radeon RX 9060 XT Nitro+ OC stands out with a large factory overclock, making it the fastest card tested today. Its cooling solution is equally remarkable, achieving virtually inaudible noise levels even under full gaming load, and temperatures are still excellent.

www.techpowerup.com

 

[Nabinium]

I'd also go for the 9060 XT 16GB. The £100 saving you'd get right now on the 9060 XT 16GB is pretty tough to beat, but also performance wise, both cards are very close, so you are unlikely to see much difference. Not worth paying extra for the 5060ti at the moment IMO.

 

[nheather]

9060 XT 16G is only £299 on OcUK, that is £100 cheaper, easy choice.

But it's not really a £100 saving for me.


I appreciate that the PowerColor Reaper is currently on sale for £300 but I am not keen on that card. I don't know if you have seen it against other 9060s but it is tiny, I mean really tiny. It has not done so well in reviews compared with the competition, in terms of temperatures and fan noise - due to its tiny heatsink and tiny fans. Reviews that I have seen suggest that you should choose a competitor unless your case is really limited for space.

So, the 9060XT I would be considering is £330 and 5060Ti would be £380, so £50 difference.

Not saying that £50 is a trivial amount, just that it is on the way to discounting if the 5060Ti is demonstrably better.

To give the idea of the size of the reaper, compared with two other dual fan cards, the Sapphire Pulse and the XFX Swift.

The Reaper is 57% the size (volume) of the Pulse
The Reaper is 49% the size (volume) of the Swift

 

[Tetras]

To be honest, I don’t really know what ray tracing is, I doubt I have ever had it turned on because my current and previous rigs have only been good for low/medium settings.

I also expect that either card will be more than my current needs which is 1080 gaming, though if/when I change my monitor I would like to move to 1440.

It used to be that we'd say it isn't even worth bothering because the performance hit was too big for ~£300 cards to sustain, but ray tracing is a bigger deal than back then and games may start to require it.

That said, AMD have closed the gap a lot, to the point I'd say upscaling is just as important (if not more important) to consider than ray tracing.

 

[Gray2233]

• The 9060XT is cheaper, saving around £50-£60 when comparing cards at the same tier

I think people get too hung up on the "tier" of a specific card range, especially when looking at lower end offerings. There absolutely are some cards which should be avoided for various reasons, but essentially you're looking at low energy use cards that don't pump out a lot of heat. The only thing you're generally getting from spending more on a specific version is a prettier card and a needlessly overbuilt cooling solution that performs near identically in actual games.

If I was choosing between a 9060XT and a 5060ti I'd be looking at the absolute cheapest version (within reason), I might factor in another £10-20 for a longer warranty or if the absolute cheapest has fans that sound like a hive of angry bees, but otherwise it's £299 vs £379 and I'd save the £80 in that scenario unless I really needed Nvidia specific features for content creation etc.

Spending 25% more for pretty much the exact same gaming performance would leave a bad taste in my mouth to be frank.

 

[nheather]

Thanks for the insight. I decided to stick with the the 9060XT and placed an order. I didn’t go with the reaper though as I do feel it is overly small.

 

[Charlatan]

But it's not really a £100 saving for me.


I appreciate that the PowerColor Reaper is currently on sale for £300 but I am not keen on that card. I don't know if you have seen it against other 9060s but it is tiny, I mean really tiny. It has not done so well in reviews compared with the competition, in terms of temperatures and fan noise - due to its tiny heatsink and tiny fans. Reviews that I have seen suggest that you should choose a competitor unless your case is really limited for space.

So, the 9060XT I would be considering is £330 and 5060Ti would be £380, so £50 difference.

Not saying that £50 is a trivial amount, just that it is on the way to discounting if the 5060Ti is demonstrably better.

To give the idea of the size of the reaper, compared with two other dual fan cards, the Sapphire Pulse and the XFX Swift.

The Reaper is 57% the size (volume) of the Pulse
The Reaper is 49% the size (volume) of the Swift

Put the Reaper in my lads PC last week and has been excellent