GeForce GT 520 vs GTX 460 768MB

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 460 768MB and GeForce GT 520, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 460 768MB
4.37
+433%

GTX 460 768MB outperforms GT 520 by a whopping 433% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking6741145
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiencyno data1.95
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameno dataGF119
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release dateno data13 April 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$59

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores33648
Core clock speed675 MHz810 MHz
Number of transistorsno data292 million
Manufacturing process technologyno data40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data29 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data102 °C
Texture fill rateno data6.480
Floating-point processing powerno data0.1555 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8

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).

Bus supportno data16x PCI-E 2.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Heightno data2.7" (6.9 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB (DDR3)
Memory bus width192 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz900 MHz (DDR3)
Memory bandwidthno data14.4 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectorsno dataDual Link DVI-IHDMIVGA (optional)
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX1112 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.2
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 460 768MB 4.37
+433%
GT 520 0.82

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 460 768MB 2092
+451%
GT 520 380

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 HD44
+450%
8−9
−450%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data7.38

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Elden Ring 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Valorant 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Dota 2 10
+900%
1−2
−900%
Elden Ring 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Fortnite 24−27
+525%
4−5
−525%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+650%
2−3
−650%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+443%
7−8
−443%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
Valorant 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
World of Tanks 70−75
+508%
12−14
−508%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Dota 2 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+443%
7−8
−443%
Valorant 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 3−4 0−1
Elden Ring 5−6 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+500%
5−6
−500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1
World of Tanks 30−35
+520%
5−6
−520%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1
Valorant 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Elden Ring 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Fortnite 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4 0−1
Valorant 4−5 0−1

This is how GTX 460 768MB and GT 520 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 460 768MB is 450% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.37 0.82

GTX 460 768MB has a 432.9% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GTX 460 768MB is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 520 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 768MB
GeForce GTX 460 768MB
NVIDIA GeForce GT 520
GeForce GT 520

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 96 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 460 768MB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 777 votes

Rate GeForce GT 520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.