Should You Invest in 16GB GPUs in 2025?

From F1 25 to Spider Man 2, learn how extra VRAM and full PCIe lanes sustain smooth gameplay

Hardware by Katmin on Jul 28, 2025

Over the past few months, extensive testing of new 8GB graphics cards from AMD and Nvidia showed that they struggle to deliver the performance expected in modern titles. In contrast, their 16GB counterparts consistently provide playable frame rates and smoother experiences, even under demanding conditions.

To explore how viable these 8GB models are in 2025—and under what circumstances—we dug into detailed comparisons using PCIe 5.0, 4.0, and 3.0 systems across several popular games at 1440p.

Should You Invest, 16GB GPUs, 2025, NoobFeed

Challenge of 8GB VRAM and PCIe Bandwidth

Modern games frequently exceed 8GB of VRAM when using high or ultra presets at 1440p. While lowering visual quality can restore playability, it isn’t an ideal solution for a brand new purchase or for longevity.

We also observed that PCIe bandwidth can further impact performance: AMD’s Radeon cards maintain all 16 lanes of PCIe bandwidth, whereas Nvidia’s GeForce models are often limited to eight lanes. This discrepancy becomes pronounced when VRAM limits are exceeded.

Should You Invest, 16GB GPUs, 2025, NoobFeed

Test Methodology

We compared 8GB versions of GeForce RTX 5060 Ti and Radeon RX 9060 XT using identical hardware except for the PCIe spec.

Each card was tested on PCIe 5.0, 4.0, and 3.0 motherboards, with presets chosen to push VRAM usage beyond 8GB while still allowing the 16GB models to remain playable.

All averages are based on three run averages, and we focused on both average frame rates and 1% lows to capture frame time consistency.

F1 25 Performance

Using the High preset, 8GB 9060 XT delivered notably higher 1% lows than 8GB 5060 Ti across both PCIe 4.0 and 5.0, thanks to its full 16 lane bandwidth.

When we dropped to PCIe 3.0, 5060 Ti’s 1% low plunged well below 60 fps, whereas 9060 XT still averaged 95 fps.

Even including the 16GB models tested on PCIe 3.0, 9060 XT averaged 190 fps—13% faster than its 8GB sibling on PCIe 5.0 and up to 45% faster when both ran on PCIe 3.0.

Should You Invest, 16GB GPUs, 2025, NoobFeed

Marvel’s Spider Man 2

With Very High settings at 1440p, 8GB 9060 XT approached 90 fps average on PCIe 5.0 but suffered 1% lows below 60 fps. 8GB 5060 Ti, however, was effectively unplayable—even on PCIe 5.0—due to just 8 lanes of bandwidth.

On PCIe 4.0, 9060 XT remained borderline usable, while both 8GB cards fell apart on PCIe 3.0.

16GB 9060 XT held a clear advantage: 26% higher average fps and 18% stronger 1% lows compared to 16GB 5060 Ti.

Monster Hunter Wilds

On the Ultra preset at 1440p with quality upscaling, both 8GB cards were already crippled under PCIe 5.0. 16GB 9060 XT managed 67 fps average with 54 fps 1% lows, while the 8GB model dropped to 50 fps average and erratic lows.

Surprisingly, reducing PCIe bandwidth sometimes stabilized the lows as average frame rates fell, but performance remained far below acceptable levels.

8GB 5060 Ti was consistently broken under these conditions, even though its 16GB version outpaced 9060 XT in average fps.

Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart

At Very High settings, we saw 8GB 5060 Ti produce a higher average fps than 8GB 9060 XT on PCIe 5.0, but with far worse 1% lows.

Dropping to PCIe 3.0 amplified the issue: 5060 Ti became completely unusable, while 9060 XT was merely very poor.

In contrast, 16GB 5060 Ti outpaced 16GB 9060 XT by 5% in average fps, though the Radeon card again delivered 21% stronger 1% lows.

Should You Invest, 16GB GPUs, 2025, NoobFeed

Indiana Jones and the Great Circle

On Very High settings, 8GB 5060 Ti could not run the Ultra preset at all without manually reducing texture pool size—a downgrade not required for the 16GB cards.

Even on PCIe 5.0, 8GB 5060 Ti was broken, while 9060 XT remained usable on both PCIe 5.0 and 4.0. On PCIe 3.0, neither 8GB card provided a satisfactory experience.

16GB 9060 XT led by 17% in average frame rate over its Nvidia rival.

Dragon Age: The Veilguard

Under Ultra at 1440p, neither 8GB card could deliver playable performance; both averaged well below 60 fps with horrific 1% lows. Interestingly, the 8GB 5060 Ti recorded slightly better lows than the 9060 XT in this title, but neither was acceptable.

Among 16GB models, 5060 Ti was 8% faster on average, though 9060 XT again boasted an 11% advantage in 1% lows.

Six Game Geomean

Calculating the geometric mean across these six titles at 1440p, 16GB 9060 XT was only 2% faster on average than 16GB 5060 Ti, but its 1% lows were 22% stronger. Both 8GB cards failed to maintain 1% lows above 60 fps, averaging closer to 30 fps.

Although 8GB 9060 XT “annihilated” 8GB 5060 Ti in head to head average fps, it remained unusable in several games without quality compromises.

Should You Invest, 16GB GPUs, 2025, NoobFeed

Final Thoughts

In scenarios where you exceed 8GB of VRAM, 8GB 9060 XT outperforms 8GB 5060 Ti primarily due to full PCIe lane support.

At typical street prices of around $300 for the 8GB models, Radeon is the lesser evil, and at discounted prices near $250, it becomes a tempting bargain despite its limitations.

However, paying a premium for a 16GB graphics card is the only way to ensure a more future proof experience.

We recommend opting for 16GB 9060 XT, even at $20–$30 above MSRP; it will deliver smoother performance today and maintain viability over the next 3–4 years.

Also, check our other hardware articles: