MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB
MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB

MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB

Overview

When choosing between two closely related graphics cards, the finer details become the deciding factor. This page compares the MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB and the MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB, examining how their GPU boost clocks and resulting performance metrics differ, while both cards share the same Blackwell architecture, 16GB of GDDR7 memory, and an identical feature set including ray tracing and DLSS support.

Common Features

  • Both cards have a base GPU clock speed of 2407 MHz.
  • Both cards have a GPU memory speed of 1750 MHz.
  • Both cards feature 4608 shading units.
  • Both cards have 144 texture mapping units (TMUs).
  • Both cards have 48 render output units (ROPs).
  • Double Precision Floating Point (DPFP) is supported on both cards.
  • Both cards have an effective memory speed of 28000 MHz.
  • Both cards offer a maximum memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
  • Both cards come with 16GB of VRAM.
  • Both cards use GDDR7 memory.
  • Both cards have a 128-bit memory bus width.
  • ECC memory is supported on both cards.
  • Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate.
  • Both cards support OpenGL version 4.6.
  • Both cards support OpenCL version 3.
  • Multi-display technology is supported on both cards.
  • Ray tracing is supported on both cards.
  • DLSS is supported on both cards.
  • XeSS (XMX) is not available on either card.
  • 3D support is available on both cards.
  • Both cards have one HDMI 2.1b output and three DisplayPort outputs.
  • Neither card has USB-C or DVI outputs.
  • Both cards are based on the Blackwell GPU architecture built on a 5 nm process.
  • Both cards have a Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 180W.
  • Both cards use PCIe version 5.
  • Both cards feature 21900 million transistors.
  • Air-water cooling is not available on either card.
  • Both cards measure 226 mm in width and 126 mm in height.

Main Differences

  • GPU turbo clock speed is 2602 MHz on MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB and 2572 MHz on MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB.
  • Pixel rate is 124.9 GPixel/s on MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB and 123.5 GPixel/s on MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB.
  • Floating-point performance is 23.98 TFLOPS on MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB and 23.7 TFLOPS on MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB.
  • Texture rate is 374.7 GTexels/s on MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB and 370.4 GTexels/s on MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB.
Specs Comparison
MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB

MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB

MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB

MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB

Performance:
GPU clock speed 2407 MHz 2407 MHz
GPU turbo 2602 MHz 2572 MHz
pixel rate 124.9 GPixel/s 123.5 GPixel/s
floating-point performance 23.98 TFLOPS 23.7 TFLOPS
texture rate 374.7 GTexels/s 370.4 GTexels/s
GPU memory speed 1750 MHz 1750 MHz
shading units 4608 4608
texture mapping units (TMUs) 144 144
render output units (ROPs) 48 48
Has Double Precision Floating Point (DPFP)

At their core, these two cards are nearly identical silicon: both share the same 2407 MHz base clock, 4608 shading units, 144 TMUs, 48 ROPs, and 1750 MHz memory speed. This tells you they are built on the same GPU die with the same memory subsystem, meaning their performance floors are indistinguishable under sustained load when both cards are thermally constrained.

The only meaningful divergence in this group lies in the boost clock. The Shadow 2X OC Plus reaches a turbo of 2602 MHz versus 2572 MHz on the standard Shadow 2X Plus — a 30 MHz advantage. That gap, while modest in absolute terms, cascades into slightly higher derived throughput figures: 23.98 TFLOPS versus 23.7 TFLOPS of floating-point performance, and a texture rate of 374.7 GTexels/s versus 370.4 GTexels/s. In practice, this translates to roughly a 1–1.5% theoretical performance lead for the OC Plus — noticeable in benchmark numbers, but unlikely to produce a perceptible difference in real-world gaming frame rates.

The OC Plus holds a narrow but clear edge in this group strictly by virtue of its factory overclocked boost clock. Both cards support Double Precision Floating Point, which is rarely relevant for gaming but useful for GPU-accelerated compute workloads. For a pure gaming buyer, the performance delta here is marginal; the decision will more realistically hinge on price and thermal/acoustic characteristics rather than this clock speed difference alone.

Memory:
effective memory speed 28000 MHz 28000 MHz
maximum memory bandwidth 448 GB/s 448 GB/s
VRAM 16GB 16GB
GDDR version GDDR7 GDDR7
memory bus width 128-bit 128-bit
Supports ECC memory

Memory is one area where these two cards offer absolutely no grounds for differentiation. Every single spec is identical: 16GB of GDDR7 running at an effective 28000 MHz across a 128-bit bus, delivering 448 GB/s of bandwidth. Both also support ECC memory, which enables error-correcting functionality useful in professional or compute-adjacent workloads.

The numbers themselves deserve context. GDDR7 is a significant generational leap in memory efficiency, and the 448 GB/s figure is notably high for a 128-bit bus — a width that on older GDDR6 cards would have been a bottleneck. Here, GDDR7's speed compensates effectively, making the narrow bus far less of a concern for 1080p and 1440p gaming. The 16GB VRAM capacity is also genuinely future-facing at this tier, comfortably handling high-resolution texture packs and modern titles with aggressive VRAM usage.

This group is a complete tie. There is no memory-related reason to prefer one card over the other — buyers should look entirely to other specification groups, pricing, and cooling design to make their decision.

Features:
DirectX version DirectX 12 Ultimate DirectX 12 Ultimate
OpenGL version 4.6 4.6
OpenCL version 3 3
Supports multi-display technology
supports ray tracing
Supports 3D
supports DLSS
has XeSS (XMX)
AMD SAM / Intel Resizable BAR Intel Resizable BAR Intel Resizable BAR
has LHR
has RGB lighting
supported displays 4 4

Feature parity is total between these two cards. Both carry DirectX 12 Ultimate support, which is the relevant ceiling for modern gaming — enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing, mesh shaders, and variable-rate shading in titles that support them. Paired with ray tracing and DLSS support, both cards are fully equipped for NVIDIA's current-generation rendering pipeline, where DLSS in particular can deliver meaningful frame rate gains with minimal visual cost.

A few details are worth flagging for specific use cases. Support for up to 4 simultaneous displays makes either card a capable multi-monitor workstation GPU, not just a gaming card. Intel Resizable BAR support allows the CPU to access the full VRAM pool at once rather than in chunks, which can yield modest performance improvements in supported games and systems. Neither card carries an LHR limiter or RGB lighting — straightforward omissions that will suit buyers prioritizing clean aesthetics and unrestricted compute workloads respectively.

With every feature flag identical across both products, this group produces a complete tie. No feature-based argument exists for choosing one over the other — the decision remains, as with memory, entirely a matter of clock speeds, thermals, and price.

Ports:
has an HDMI output
HDMI ports 1 1
HDMI version HDMI 2.1b HDMI 2.1b
DisplayPort outputs 3 3
USB-C ports 0 0
DVI outputs 0 0
mini DisplayPort outputs 0 0

Port configuration is once again a non-differentiator. Both cards offer an identical layout: 3 DisplayPort outputs and 1 HDMI 2.1b port, totaling four display connections — consistent with the four-display limit noted in the Features group. The absence of USB-C, DVI, or mini DisplayPort outputs is standard for modern mid-to-high-end discrete GPUs.

The quality of those ports matters as much as the quantity. HDMI 2.1b is the latest HDMI specification, supporting up to 4K at high refresh rates and 8K output — relevant for users connecting to high-end TVs or next-generation monitors. The three DisplayPort outputs, while their exact version is not specified in the provided data, combined with HDMI 2.1b give both cards a versatile and future-resistant connectivity profile for single or multi-monitor setups.

There is no basis for differentiation here — this group is a complete tie. Both cards will serve single-display gamers, multi-monitor enthusiasts, and home theater setups equally well.

General info:
GPU architecture Blackwell Blackwell
release date April 2025 April 2025
Thermal Design Power (TDP) 180W 180W
PCI Express (PCIe) version 5 5
semiconductor size 5 nm 5 nm
number of transistors 21900 million 21900 million
Has air-water cooling
width 226 mm 226 mm
height 126 mm 126 mm

Underneath the cooler shroud, both cards are built on exactly the same foundation. The Blackwell architecture on a 5nm process node with 21.9 billion transistors confirms these are identical dies — not binned variants or cut-down SKUs of each other. The 180W TDP means both will draw the same power from your system and generate equivalent heat loads, making PSU and case airflow requirements interchangeable between the two.

The shared PCIe 5.0 interface is worth noting for longevity: while current games do not meaningfully saturate even PCIe 4.0 bandwidth, the newer interface provides headroom for data-intensive workloads and ensures these cards remain compatible with next-generation platform upgrades without any bandwidth ceiling. Physical dimensions are also identical at 226 mm × 126 mm, so case compatibility and slot clearance are a non-issue when comparing the two — what fits one will fit the other.

This group is a complete tie in every measurable respect. Both cards are the same chip, the same process, the same power envelope, and the same size. The general hardware identity reinforces what earlier groups have already shown: the only real difference between these two products is the factory boost clock on the OC Plus variant.

Comparison Summary & Verdict

Both the MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB and the MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB are grounded in the same Blackwell architecture, built on a 5 nm process, and offer identical configurations of 16GB GDDR7 memory with 448 GB/s bandwidth, the same port layout, a 180W TDP, and full support for ray tracing and DLSS. The meaningful distinction lies in the factory overclock: the OC Plus model achieves a higher GPU turbo clock of 2602 MHz compared to 2572 MHz on the standard model, translating into a slightly superior floating-point performance of 23.98 TFLOPS versus 23.7 TFLOPS and a higher texture rate of 374.7 GTexels/s against 370.4 GTexels/s. These gains are real but incremental. The OC Plus is the better fit for users who want maximum out-of-the-box performance, while the standard Shadow 2X Plus suits those for whom the base boost clock is sufficient and a lower asking price may be a factor.

MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB
Buy MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB if...

Buy the MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X OC Plus 16GB if you want the highest out-of-the-box GPU boost clock and marginally better floating-point performance without any manual overclocking.

MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB
Buy MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB if...

Buy the MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Shadow 2X Plus 16GB if the base turbo clock of 2572 MHz meets your requirements and you are seeking a card with identical memory, features, and ports at a potentially lower price point.