GeForce GTX 950M vs GTX 460 SE

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 460 OEM GTX 460 SE GTX 460 SE v2 GTX 460 v2 GTX 460 v2 ES GTX 460 X2
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
940MX 945M GTX 850A GTX 850M GTX 860M GTX 860M OEM GTX 950A GTX 950M GTX 950M Mac Edition GTX 960A GTX 960M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 460 SE with GeForce GTX 950M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 460 SE
2010
1 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
4.45

GTX 950M outperforms GTX 460 SE by a substantial 30% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GTX 460 SE GTX 460 SE
GTX 950M GTX 950M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking637581
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.04no data
Power efficiency2.356.10
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGF104GM107
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date15 November 2010 (14 years ago)13 March 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$160 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores288640
Core clock speed650 MHz914 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1124 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt75 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature104 °Cno data
Texture fill rate31.2044.96
Floating-point processing power0.7488 TFLOPS1.439 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs4840

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 datamedium sized
Bus support16x PCI-E 2.0PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length210 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data
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 typeGDDR5DDR3 or GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1700 MHz1000 or 2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth108.8 GB/s32 or 80 GB/s
Shared memory--

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.

Number of display connectors2no data
Display Connectors2 x Dual-Link DVI-I1 x Mini HDMINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
VGA аnalog display supportno data+
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno data+
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GameStream-+
GeForce ShadowPlay-+
GPU Boostno data2.0
GameWorks-+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder-+
Optimus-+
BatteryBoost-+
Anselno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.14.5
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
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.

GTX 460 SE 4.45
GTX 950M 5.77
+29.7%

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.

GTX 460 SE 1990
GTX 950M 2579
+29.6%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 460 SE 6340
GTX 950M 9741
+53.6%

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 HD21−24
−42.9%
30
+42.9%
1440p16−18
−31.3%
21
+31.3%
4K10−12
−50%
15
+50%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.62no data
1440p10.00no data
4K16.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 31
+0%
31
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Fortnite 65
+0%
65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 26
+0%
26
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 73
+0%
73
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Fortnite 24
+0%
24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20
+0%
20
+0%
Metro Exodus 5
+0%
5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 67
+0%
67
+0%
Far Cry 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+0%
11
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 22
+0%
22
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 6
+0%
6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how GTX 460 SE and GTX 950M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 950M is 43% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 950M is 31% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 950M is 50% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 4.45 5.77
Recency 15 November 2010 13 March 2015
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 75 Watt

GTX 950M has a 29.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 950M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 460 SE in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 460 SE is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 950M 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 SE
GeForce GTX 460 SE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
GeForce GTX 950M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

GTX 460 SE GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
ATI HD 5850 Radeon HD 5850
GTX 950M GeForce GTX 950M
vs
GTX 780M Mac Edition GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition
GTX 460 SE GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
HD 6850 Radeon HD 6850
Parhelia APVe
vs
ATI Mach 64 GX 64 GX
G450
vs
Mystique G200
G550
vs
RTX 4070 Ti RTX 4070 Ti
Parhelia 256 MB
vs
RX 6800 RX 6800
Parhelia 256 MB
vs
RTX 2000 Ada Generation RTX 2000 Ada Generation
GTX 460 SE GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
GT 740 OEM GT 740 OEM
GTX 460 SE GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
HD 7470A HD 7470A
GTX 460 SE GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
GTS 250 GTS 250
GTX 460 SE GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
GeForce4 Ti 4600 Ti 4600
GTX 460 SE GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
Radeon 610M Radeon 610M

Community ratings

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

3.9 143 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1150 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 950M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 460 SE or GeForce GTX 950M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.