Radeon RX 6800 XT vs GeForce GTX 460 OEM
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 460 OEM and Radeon RX 6800 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
6800 XT outperforms 460 OEM by a whopping 1999% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 847 | 43 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 39.44 |
| Power efficiency | 1.48 | 15.59 |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | GF104 | Navi 21 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 11 October 2010 (16 years ago) | 28 October 2020 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $649 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 336 | 4608 |
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz | 1825 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2250 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,950 million | 26,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 300 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 36.40 | 648.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.8736 TFLOPS | 20.74 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 128 |
| TMUs | 56 | 288 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 72 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 1.1 MB |
| L1 Cache | 448 KB | 1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 4 MB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 128 MB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | 210 mm | 267 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | 2x 8-pin |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 850 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 108.8 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI | 1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
| HDMI | + | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
| CUDA | 2.1 | - |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 9−10
−95.4%
| 195 |
| 1440p | 6−7
−95.7%
| 138 |
| 4K | 4−5 | 92
+2200%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 3.33 |
| 1440p | no data | 4.70 |
| 4K | no data | 7.05 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 290−300 | 290−300 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 150−160 | 150−160 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 140−150 | 140−150 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 180−190 | 180−190 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 191 | 191 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 290−300 | 290−300 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 150−160 | 150−160 |
| Far Cry 5 | 143 | 143 |
| Fortnite | 280−290 | 280−290 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 230−240 | 230−240 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 140−150 | 140−150 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180 | 170−180 |
| Valorant | 350−400 | 350−400 |
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 183 | 183 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 290−300 | 290−300 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280 | 270−280 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 150−160 | 150−160 |
| Dota 2 | 166 | 166 |
| Far Cry 5 | 139 | 139 |
| Fortnite | 280−290 | 280−290 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 230−240 | 230−240 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 150 | 150 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 140−150 | 140−150 |
| Metro Exodus | 152 | 152 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180 | 170−180 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 294 | 294 |
| Valorant | 350−400 | 350−400 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 175 | 175 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 150−160 | 150−160 |
| Dota 2 | 145 | 145 |
| Far Cry 5 | 130 | 130 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 230−240 | 230−240 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 140−150 | 140−150 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180 | 170−180 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 160 | 160 |
| Valorant | 356 | 356 |
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 280−290 | 280−290 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 180−190 | 180−190 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 450−500 | 450−500 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 120 | 120 |
| Metro Exodus | 95 | 95 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180 | 170−180 |
| Valorant | 400−450 | 400−450 |
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 154 | 154 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85 | 80−85 |
| Far Cry 5 | 131 | 131 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 200−210 | 200−210 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 75−80 | 75−80 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 140−150 | 140−150 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 150−160 | 150−160 |
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85 | 80−85 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 134 | 134 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 40−45 | 40−45 |
| Metro Exodus | 56 | 56 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 110 | 110 |
| Valorant | 300−350 | 300−350 |
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 103 | 103 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85 | 80−85 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45 | 40−45 |
| Dota 2 | 122 | 122 |
| Far Cry 5 | 95 | 95 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 150−160 | 150−160 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 40−45 | 40−45 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 95−100 | 95−100 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 75−80 | 75−80 |
This is how GTX 460 OEM and RX 6800 XT compete in popular games:
- RX 6800 XT is 2067% faster in 1080p
- RX 6800 XT is 2200% faster in 1440p
- RX 6800 XT is 2200% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.86 | 60.04 |
| Recency | 11 October 2010 | 28 October 2020 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 16 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 300 Watt |
GTX 460 OEM has 50% lower power consumption.
RX 6800 XT, on the other hand, has a 1999% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 83% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 6800 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 460 OEM in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
