Radeon HD 6950M vs GeForce GTX 460 SE

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
460 OEM 460 SE 460 SE v2 460 v2 460 v2 ES 460 X2
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
6950M 6970M 6970M Crossfire 6970M Mac Edition 6970M Rebrand 6970M X2 6990M 6990M Crossfire 6990M Rebrand

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 460 SE with Radeon HD 6950M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 460 SE
2010, $160
1 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
4.76
+43.8%

460 SE outperforms HD 6950M by a considerable 44% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GTX 460 SE GTX 460 SE
HD 6950M HD 6950M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking682785
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.06no data
Power efficiency2.445.08
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGF104Blackcomb
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date15 November 2010 (15 years ago)4 January 2011 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$160 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores288960
Core clock speed650 MHz580 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million1,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt50 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature104 °Cno data
Texture fill rate31.2027.84
Floating-point processing power0.7488 TFLOPS1.114 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs4848
L1 Cache384 KB192 KB
L2 Cache512 KB512 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 support16x PCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1700 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth108.8 GB/s115.2 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.

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

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.14.4
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 57 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 4.76 3.31
Recency 15 November 2010 4 January 2011
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 460 SE has a 43.8% higher aggregate performance score.

HD 6950M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 month, and 200% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 460 SE is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6950M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 460 SE is a desktop graphics card while Radeon HD 6950M 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
AMD Radeon HD 6950M
Radeon HD 6950M
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
HD 6950M Radeon HD 6950M
vs
GeForce MX110 GeForce MX110
GTX 460 SE GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
HD 6850 Radeon HD 6850
Matrox Parhelia PCI
vs
RTX 3070 RTX 3070
Matrox Parhelia PCI
vs
Iris Xe Graphics 96EU Xe Graphics 96EU
GTX 460 SE NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
HD 6970M Crossfire HD 6970M Crossfire
GTX 460 SE NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
HD 6990M HD 6990M
GTX 460 SE NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
HD 6970M HD 6970M
GTX 460 SE NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
HD 7470 OEM HD 7470 OEM
GTX 460 SE NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
HD 6970M Mac Edition HD 6970M Mac Edition
GTX 460 SE NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
HD 6970M Rebrand HD 6970M Rebrand
GTX 460 SE NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
FireStream 9350 FireStream 9350
GTX 460 SE NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE
vs
ATI V9800P FirePro V9800P

Community ratings

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

3.9 150 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Radeon HD 6950M 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 Radeon HD 6950M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.