Recently proposed evaluation benchmarks aim to characterize the effective context length and the forgetting tendencies of large language models (LLMs). However, these benchmarks often rely on simplistic 'needle in a haystack' retrieval or continuation tasks that may not accurately reflect the performance of these models in information-dense scenarios. Thus, rather than simple next token prediction, we argue for evaluating these models on more complex reasoning tasks that requires them to induce structured relational knowledge from the text - such as graphs from potentially noisy natural language content. While the input text can be viewed as generated in terms of a graph, its structure is not made explicit and connections must be induced from distributed textual cues, separated by long contexts and interspersed with irrelevant information. Our findings reveal that LLMs begin to exhibit memory drift and contextual forgetting at much shorter effective lengths when tasked with this form of relational reasoning, compared to what existing benchmarks suggest. With these findings, we offer recommendations for the optimal use of popular LLMs for complex reasoning tasks. We further show that even models specialized for reasoning, such as OpenAI o1, remain vulnerable to early memory drift in these settings. These results point to significant limitations in the models' ability to abstract structured knowledge from unstructured input and highlight the need for architectural adaptations to improve long-range reasoning.