OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£660VRAM:16 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):180 W

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 2 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB
7.4/10

Overall score

Score
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 50% of models
Score components

40%

7.3

Technical score

25%

7.3

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

7.3

Sentiment score

â–²Better than 50% of graphics cards
7.3

Value for money

Value for money
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
Score components

70%

7.4

Overall score

30%

7.0

Price

â–¼Worse than 62%
7.3

Technical score

Technical score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 57% of models
Score components

44%

6.3

Performance

24%

6.7

Memory

12%

9.3

Power

11%

9.8

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

10

Connectivity

â–²Better than 57%
7.3

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models

7.3

Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

6.5

Popularity

Grades by review (2)
2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 68%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • colorful-igame-geforce-rtx-5060-ti-ultra-w-oc-16gb
colorful-igame-geforce-rtx-5060-ti-ultra-w-oc-16gb
Where to buy
    N/A~ £660
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What owners say about the COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB

Based on 232 owners sharing their experience in online comments

68%positive6%mixed26%negative

Owners praise smooth gaming and generous memory, while limited VRAM and driver problems frustrate some.

What owners dislike

  • Some owners get black screens or stalled installs after updating Nvidia drivers; a clean DDU reinstall fixed one case.5
  • Some owners say demanding games like Monster Hunter Wilds stay under 60 fps at 1440p without frame generation; a 5070 is faster.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB

Technical score
Technical score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 57% of models
Score components:

44%

6.3

Performance

24%

6.7

Memory

12%

9.3

Power

11%

9.8

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

10

Connectivity

7.3
Reviews score
7.3
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
Score components:

70%

7.4

Overall score

30%

7.0

Price

7.3
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
14,779 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 14,779 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 49.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.4% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
10,691 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 10,691 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 57.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
22,649 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 22,649 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 50.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
11,317 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 11,317 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 53.8% of graphics cards and equal to 1.3% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
23.7 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 23.7 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 52.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
16 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 16 GB of VRAM, which is more than 62% of graphics cards and equal to 28.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR7
This graphics card uses GDDR7 memory, which is newer than on 79.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.4% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
448 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 448 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 41.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 11.8% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
28,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 28,000 MHz, which is faster than that of 78.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 16.8% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
5
This graphics card supports PCIe 5, which is newer than on 73% of graphics cards and equal to 27% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x8
This graphics card uses x8 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 75.9% of graphics cards and equal to 22.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.8% of graphics cards and equal to 77.2% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
2.1b
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 2.1b, which is more advanced than on 77.8% of graphics cards and equal to 22.2% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
77.37 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 77.37 Gbps, which is faster than on 83.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
180 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 180 W, which is lower than that of 57.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 5% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
180 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 180 W under peak load, which is lower than 60.8% of graphics cards and equal to 4.6% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
600 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 600 W PSU, which is lower than that of 53.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.6% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
180 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 180 W, which is lower than that of 61.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
180 W
Show more
Size
301x 111x 40 mm
Length
300.5 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 300.5 mm long, which is longer than 60.2% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Height
120 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 120 mm tall, which is shorter than 59.3% of graphics cards and equal in height to 5.3% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2.5 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s, which is slimmer than 35.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 14.7% of graphics cards.
Weight
970 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 970 g, which is lighter than 57.4% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of Graphics cards.
Show more

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 5.1% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,632 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,632 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 25.4% higher base clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher base GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,407 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    2,407 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • 47.4% faster memory speed
    This graphics card has a higher effective memory speed than the average graphics card (28,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    28,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • Newer PCIe version
    This graphics card supports a newer PCIe version than the average graphics card (5 vs 4).
    5 vs 4
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2.1b vs 1.4a).
    2.1b vs 1.4a
  • 2 years newer
    This graphics card was released more recently than the average graphics card (2025 vs 2023).
    April 2025
    2025 vs 2023
  • 8 °C higher thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a higher thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (87 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    87 °C vs 95 °C
  • 5.1% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,632 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,632 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 25.4% higher base clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher base GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,407 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    2,407 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 2 years newer
    This graphics card was released more recently than the average graphics card (2025 vs 2023).
    April 2025
    2025 vs 2023
  • 3.14x higher INT8 performance
    This graphics card has a higher INT8 performance than the average graphics card (759 TOPS vs 242 TOPS). The average graphics card has INT8 performance of 242 TOPS.
    759 TOPS vs 242 TOPS
  • 47.4% faster memory speed
    This graphics card has a higher effective memory speed than the average graphics card (28,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    28,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • Newer GDDR version
    This graphics card uses a newer GDDR version than the average graphics card (GDDR7 vs GDDR6).
    GDDR7 vs GDDR6
  • 8x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (32 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    32 MB vs 4 MB
  • Newer PCIe version
    This graphics card supports a newer PCIe version than the average graphics card (5 vs 4).
    5 vs 4
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2.1b vs 1.4a).
    2.1b vs 1.4a
  • 4x higher HDMI bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher HDMI bandwidth than the average graphics card (48 Gbps vs 12 Gbps). The average graphics card has HDMI bandwidth of 12 Gbps.
    48 Gbps vs 12 Gbps
  • Newer HDMI version
    This graphics card supports a newer HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1b vs 2.1a).
    2.1b vs 2.1a
  • 3.58x higher DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (77.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    77.37 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • More NVENC sessions
    This graphics card has more concurrent NVENC sessions than the average graphics card (12 vs 8). The average graphics card has 8 concurrent NVENC sessions.
    12 vs 8
  • 8 °C higher thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a higher thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (87 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    87 °C vs 95 °C
  • 16.3% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (180 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    180 W vs 215 W
  • 7.7% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (600 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    600 W vs 650 W
  • 7 °C lower load temperature
    This graphics card has a lower load temperature than the average graphics card (60 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    60 °C vs 67 °C
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • 16 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (48 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    48 vs 64
  • 40 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (144 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    144 vs 184
  • 4 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (36 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    36 vs 40
  • 21.7% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (126.3 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    126.3 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 4 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (36 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    36 vs 40
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 26.9% more expensive
    COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB is more expensive than the average graphics card (£660 vs £520).
    £660 vs £520
  • 6.4% lower sentiment score
    7.3 vs 7.8
  • 16 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (48 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    48 vs 64
  • 40 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (144 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    144 vs 184
  • 4 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (36 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    36 vs 40
  • 21.7% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (126.3 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    126.3 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 4 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (36 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    36 vs 40
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 18.3 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (300.5 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    300.5 mm vs 282.2 mm

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

8.0
DanKamYouKnow
≈ estimated
16/04/2025
Unboxing and install · thermals and gaming tests
Verdict
COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB is a solid choice if you can find it at the right price.
7.0
Tech YES City
≈ estimated
17/05/2025
Comparison · iGame Ultra vs Ventus noise and performance
Verdict
COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB is a decent, quieter pick, but it is hard to find and only mediocre in performance.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB

  • Vibrant hip-hop and graffiti-inspired aesthetic with an all-white shroud and pink accents.
  • The 16GB of VRAM provides better future-proofing for memory-intensive modern games compared to the 8GB version.
  • Efficient thermal performance with ring-shaped fans that remain virtually silent even under load.
  • Convenient physical 'One-Key Overclock' button on the I/O bracket for a quick performance boost without opening software.
  • Excellent energy efficiency, typically drawing only around 150W-160W while gaming.
  • Strong performance in 1080p and capable 1440p gaming, especially when leveraging DLSS 4 and Multi-Frame Generation.

What customers don't like about COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB

  • High price point that often puts it close to the much more powerful RTX 5070, leading to poor value-for-money concerns.
  • Modest generational rasterisation gains (roughly 10-15%) over the previous RTX 4060 Ti.
  • The 128-bit memory bus can limit performance at higher resolutions despite the increased VRAM capacity.
  • Potential performance degradation on older PCIe 3.0 motherboards due to the limited x8 lane configuration.
  • Relatively large 2.5-slot thickness may not fit in all compact Small Form Factor (SFF) cases despite its overall 'Ultra' branding.

Verdict

The Colorful iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB is a Blackwell-architecture GPU featuring 4,608 CUDA cores and 16GB of high-speed GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a 28 Gbps effective memory speed and a boost clock of up to 2632 MHz via its signature physical "One-Key Overclock" button. Main characteristics include a distinctive white-and-pink hip-hop graffiti aesthetic, triple-fan Ultra Cooling system with ring-shaped fans, and a hollowed backplate for enhanced airflow. Its primary pros are the generous 16GB VRAM for future-proofing and AI workloads, silent operation with temperatures typically under 60°C, and exceptional power efficiency drawing roughly 150W during gaming. However, its main cons include modest generational performance gains of 10–15% over its predecessor without DLSS 4 and a relatively narrow 128-bit memory interface that can limit extreme high-resolution performance.

Compare COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Ultra W OC 16GB and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found