Arc A580 vs GeForce4 460 Go
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce4 460 Go with Arc A580, including specs and performance data.
A580 outperforms GeForce4 460 Go by a whopping 288000% 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 | 1601 | 230 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 12.85 |
| Architecture | Celsius (1999−2005) | Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) |
| GPU code name | NV17 A5 | DG2-512 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 14 October 2002 (24 years ago) | 10 October 2023 (3 years ago) |
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 | 2 | 3072 |
| Core clock speed | 250 MHz | 1700 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 250 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 29 million | 21,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 150 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 175 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 1.000 | 384.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 12.29 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 2 | 96 |
| TMUs | 4 | 192 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 384 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 24 |
| L2 Cache | no data | 8 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 | AGP 4x | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 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 | DDR | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 64 MB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 250 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 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 | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0 |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 8.0 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 1.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
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 | -0−1 | 103 |
| 1440p | -0−1 | 56 |
| 4K | -0−1 | 33 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Hogwarts Legacy | 4−5 | 109
+2625%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 107
+5250%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 4−5 | 78
+1850%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 110−120
+1586%
|
| Valorant | 24−27 | 190−200
+631%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 9−10 | 270−280
+2933%
|
| Dota 2 | 7−8 | 20150−20200
+287757%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 102
+5000%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 4−5 | 64
+1500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 110−120
+1586%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6 | 174
+3380%
|
| Valorant | 24−27 | 190−200
+631%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 7−8 | 20150−20200
+287757%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 87
+4250%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 4−5 | 53
+1225%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 110−120
+1586%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6 | 68
+1260%
|
| Valorant | 24−27 | 190−200
+631%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 80
+7900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 0−1 | 170−180 |
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 75 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 55
+5400%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16 | 38
+171%
|
| Valorant | 4−5 | 170−180
+4225%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2 | 30−35
+3300%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 35−40
+3400%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 331 | 331 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 73 | 73 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 131 | 131 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120 | 110−120 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 263 | 263 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65 | 65 |
| Far Cry 5 | 134 | 134 |
| Fortnite | 130−140 | 130−140 |
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120 | 110−120 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 129 | 129 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 57 | 57 |
| Far Cry 5 | 122 | 122 |
| Fortnite | 130−140 | 130−140 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 86 | 86 |
| Metro Exodus | 97 | 97 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120 | 110−120 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 53 | 53 |
| Far Cry 5 | 114 | 114 |
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 130−140 | 130−140 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 200−210 | 200−210 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 37 | 37 |
| Metro Exodus | 57 | 57 |
| Valorant | 220−230 | 220−230 |
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 80−85 | 80−85 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 39 | 39 |
| Far Cry 5 | 87 | 87 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 39 | 39 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 70−75 | 70−75 |
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 19 | 19 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 18−20 | 18−20 |
| Metro Exodus | 37 | 37 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 61 | 61 |
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35 | 30−35 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21 | 21 |
| Far Cry 5 | 47 | 47 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 56 | 56 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 22 | 22 |
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A580 is 7900% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Arc A580 performs better in 22 tests (37%)
- there's a draw in 38 tests (63%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.01 | 28.81 |
| Recency | 14 October 2002 | 10 October 2023 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 64 MB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 150 nm | 6 nm |
Arc A580 has a 288000% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 20 years, a 12700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 96% more advanced lithography process.
The Arc A580 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce4 460 Go in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce4 460 Go is a notebook graphics card while Arc A580 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
