My 1080 isn't able to consistently play 4k at 60hz, so I very much doubt your 8k claim on a 1060, but its besides the point I guess.
I don't mind the sidebar. What are you trying to play in 4k/8k? Like I said, I doubt you're doing Cyberpunk 4k60, but there are plenty of old games that will perform well. Some require mods, and even then some will definitely look odd because they're from the 90s or 00s and have no way to scale the UI. But for turned based or real time strategy and building games utilizing sprites with a fixed amount of pixels, more pixels and more screen real estate is fantastic. Pharaoh, for instance, was released in 1999 and originally designed to run at most at 1024x768. But mods enable Pharaoh to run at modern resolutions. Because of the good quality of the original sprites, it looks fantastic in 4k IMO. I wouldn't rule out 8k for it.
The next question I'd ask is whether you need 60 FPS for all games? Make no mistake, I can tell the difference between 30, 60, and 120 Hz even just using a mouse cursor, scrolling a web browser, or watching the card animations while playing Hearts. But the option to sometimes trade refresh rate for resolution interests me. Few people are getting 4k60 in MS Flight Sim right now, but I'm pretty sure they're still having fun. Some are consciously make the choice of 4k but lower than 60 FPS, instead of higher FPS at a lower resolution. Satisfactory is another chill game where you might be willing to trade frames for resolution. Once you leave the realm of first and third person games, and get to games like Anno 1800 and GalCiv, more people than you might realize would be willing to tolerate 20-30 FPS if there are no drastic hitches. Especially in turn based games, the higher refresh simply isn't as important. I wouldn't increase resolution at the expense of frames in games like Halo or Control where you might be rapidly moving the camera in all 3 dimensions to search for enemies - 240 Hz panels shine here, though often you're sacrificing color quality, suffering backlight bleed and blooming, and perhaps other things if you've prioritized refresh rate over other panel qualities. For things like designing ships in GalCiv, I'd need to see the differences in 4k and 8k for myself before casting judgement on whether more frames and fewer pixels looks nicer than fewer frames and more pixels. Speaking of ship design, it slows to a crawl in GC3 endgame for me - what's the bottleneck in this specific scenario?
Here's one particular TV I've got my eye on, which can do both 8k60 and 4k120. And of course I still have the 1080p option that I'm typing on right now if that's the right tool for the job. Maybe by this time next year prices on that 8k TV (or something similar) will be low enough that I'll buy. Maybe not. Who knows! Everything in here is all very exploratory. But I would say 8k is more 'when' than 'if.'