- AMD received a lot of flak to make an 8 GB version of the RX 9060 XT
- A Red Exec team argued that this VRAM load is for 1080p
- Some players are not convinced and also feel AMD has seriously named this new GPU 8 GB and 16 GB pair
AMD resumed criticism after being criticized for producing a version of its new RX 9060 XT graphics card which has a loading of 8 GB of Video RAM (VRAM).
The RX 9060 XT was revealed earlier this week in 16 GB and 8 GB versions. The latter caused anger, because some support that this is not enough for modern PC games, and there are also other concerns here.
Michael Quesada, who runs a Spanish Youtube channel on the theme of the PC game, broadcast an indignant article on X asking why AMD (and NVIDIA) continues to make GPUs with 8 GB of VRAM, wondering how it is justified in 2025.
Videocardz has noticed that Frank Azor, head of AMD consumption and play marketing, was fired to answer, as you can see below.
The majority of players still play 1080p and have no use for more than 8 GB of memory. Most WW games are mainly Esports Games. We did not build it if there was no market for this. If 8 GB does not suit you, there are 16 GB. Even GPU, no compromise, just memory …May 22, 2025
Azor observes that most players still operate at a 1080p resolution and, therefore, do not need more than 8 GB of VRAM. The AMD Exec notes that the most popular games are ESports titles, which are less demanding, and that the red team would not make 8 GB graphics card if there was no request.
Azor concludes: “If 8 GB does not suit you, there are 16 GB. Even GPU, no compromise, just memory options.”
Analysis: no compromise, but a lot of cynicism
To be just towards Azor, there is real in what the executive says. Admittedly, for a more relaxed level of play, as well as for Esports titles which are designed for fluid image frequencies in general, because it is more important than graphic bells and whistles for competitive players, 8 GB is probably sufficient.
As others point out, this is not enough for all PC games, even for 1080p resolution. Although graphic adjustments detail appropriately and make compromises, you can usually get out of it, but there are notable exceptions even at 1080p.
But despite the noise made by the camp “8 GB is simply not enough these days on social networks – and it is an old racket, do not be mistaken – part of the negative feeling here is more misleading denomination.
Rather than having the RX 9060 XT 8 GB and RX 9060 XT 16GB, there should have been a clear naming delimitation between these two variants. The most widespread suggestion is that AMD should have called the 8 GB of rotation of the old RX 9060, dropping the XT suffix.
Why is the distinction of name important? Because what can happen with the two graphics cards called the “RX 9060 XT” is that the systems manufacturers simply list this as the GPU in a given PC, without details of accompanying memory. Less informed consumers do not even know that there are two different variants of the RX 9060 XT.
They may have spoken of opinions or criticisms of 16 GB flavor and assume that this is what they get in their new brilliant PC, when in fact he has the 8 GB GPU somewhat lower.
PC manufacturers can deliberately not clearly not clearly, because the system is cheaper to produce with the RX 9060 XT 8 GB, but they will not lower the price to consider this. In other words, this is a knowledge trap for manufacturers of reckless systems and a means for system manufacturers. And it is an AMD avenue could have closed with different names for 8 GB and 16 GB cards.
AMD could argue that he intends to have a Vanilla RX 9060 GPU in the future, so he could not use this name, but he could surely have found an appropriate way to designate the difference. Like call the 16 GB version on 9060 XTX (although this is a suffix reserved for the flagship GPU, you have the idea).
There is a level of misfortune and cynicism around the name here, in short, and we must note that this applies to NVIDIA as well as to AMD (with the TI XX60 models of Team Green which have 8 GB and 16 GB versions in the same vein).
AMD gets a certain credit here to ensure that it did not seem to the RX 9060 XT any more for some players with older motherboards by half reducing the number of pccy tracks supported. However, I will not enter here, because it really turns away (and that’s something I have discussed elsewhere).
To summarize: 8 GB should be acceptable for many games to a 1080p resolution, with a little drop in graphic details, if applicable – but that will not work well for everything, and the level of future feels wobbly.
In addition to that, pay attention to the pre -constructed PCs that lists an RX 9060 XT graphics card without any accompanying information – it will almost certainly be the 8 GB version, and you can pay more than you should.
For those who buy an Autonomous RX 9060 XT, it is logical to pay the premium for the 16 GB version. It is worth doing it for the only resistance in the future, and it promises to be an excellent graphics card for money as a whole.
That said, this assumes that the premium is approximately 15% according to the MRSP and that this request for the 9060 XT 16 GB does not considerably inflate the price. If this is the case, it was scrambled much more the value equation. Hopefully the stock will not be a problem, however, if rumors are right. It is only if the offer is thin that the prices in recharge begin to raise their ugly heads.
If another rumor is correct, the 16 GB card will be the RX 9060 XT model mainly stored in retailers, so it will be the one you will mainly see if you are looking for an AMD GPU, anyway.
Although this also brings the suggestion that the 8 GB flavor is more maintained to PC manufacturers, which could stretch the aforementioned flames of cynicism around this whole affair – assuming that it is more than empty chatter.
