The fit-or-no-fit conclusions are sensitive to the hardware capacity unit: the table treats an 80 GB GPU as decimal bytes before converting the usable fraction to GiB. I would make the device's reported memory in bytes an explicit calculator input rather than deriving it solely from the product label.

That is especially relevant for the two borderline rows, where a small capacity difference changes the conclusion. A worked deployment could show the reported device capacity, engine memory budget, and resulting cache allocation side by side. It would keep the useful weight and KV arithmetic reproducible on the exact hardware being considered.