GeForce GTX 480M vs GTX 460 768MB

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 460 768MB with GeForce GTX 480M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 460 768MB
3.79
+1.3%

460 768MB outperforms 480M by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking730737
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data3.03
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameno dataGF100
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release dateno data25 May 2010 (15 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores336352
Core clock speed675 MHz425 MHz
Number of transistorsno data3,100 million
Manufacturing process technologyno data40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data100 Watt
Texture fill rateno data18.70
Floating-point processing powerno data0.5984 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data44
L1 Cacheno data704 KB
L2 Cacheno data512 KB

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
Interfaceno dataMXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options-+

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz1200 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data76.8 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

API and SDK support

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

DirectX1112 API
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.5
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-+

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.

GTX 460 768MB 3.79
+1.3%
GTX 480M 3.74

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 460 768MB 2811
+28.7%
GTX 480M 2185

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 460 768MB 12262
+38.2%
GTX 480M 8872

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:

900p30−35
−10%
33
+10%
Full HD47
+14.6%
41
−14.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+1.9%
50−55
−1.9%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+1.4%
70−75
−1.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+15.4%
12−14
−15.4%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+1.9%
50−55
−1.9%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+1.9%
50−55
−1.9%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+3.3%
30−33
−3.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+2.4%
40−45
−2.4%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how GTX 460 768MB and GTX 480M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 480M is 10% faster in 900p
  • GTX 460 768MB is 15% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 460 768MB is 15% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 460 768MB performs better in 10 tests (17%)
  • there's a draw in 49 tests (83%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.79 3.74

GTX 460 768MB has a 1.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 460 768MB and GeForce GTX 480M.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 460 768MB is a desktop graphics card while GeForce GTX 480M is a notebook one.

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 GTX 480M
GeForce GTX 480M

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.


3.8 106 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2 3 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 480M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 460 768MB or GeForce GTX 480M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.