Radeon 680M vs GeForce GTX 460 v2

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 460 v2 with Radeon 680M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 460 v2
2011
1 GB GDDR5, 160 Watt
4.42

680M outperforms GTX 460 v2 by an impressive 84% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking677520
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.78no data
Power efficiency2.2213.12
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameGF114Rembrandt+
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date24 September 2011 (13 years ago)3 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 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 cores336768
Core clock speed779 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2200 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate43.62105.6
Floating-point processing power1.046 TFLOPS3.379 TFLOPS
ROPs2432
TMUs5648
Ray Tracing Coresno data12
L0 Cacheno data192 KB
L1 Cache448 KB256 KB
L2 Cache384 KB2 MB
L3 Cacheno data8 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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width192 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1002 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth96.19 GB/sno data
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMIPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA2.1-

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 v2 4.42
Radeon 680M 8.15
+84.4%

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 v2 Samples: 219 1954
Radeon 680M Samples: 3 3604
+84.4%

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 HD18−21
−106%
37
+106%
1440p9−10
−88.9%
17
+88.9%
4K5−6
−120%
11
+120%

Cost per frame, $

1080p11.06no data
1440p22.11no data
4K39.80no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 38
+0%
38
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 34
+0%
34
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 52
+0%
52
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 22
+0%
22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21
+0%
21
+0%
Dota 2 71
+0%
71
+0%
Far Cry 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 46
+0%
46
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 36
+0%
36
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 20
+0%
20
+0%
Metro Exodus 23
+0%
23
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40
+0%
40
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Dota 2 61
+0%
61
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14
+0%
14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24
+0%
24
+0%
Valorant 146
+0%
146
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
+0%
17
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
+0%
17
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+0%
13
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4
+0%
Dota 2 18
+0%
18
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how GTX 460 v2 and Radeon 680M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 680M is 106% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 680M is 89% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 680M is 120% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.42 8.15
Recency 24 September 2011 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 50 Watt

Radeon 680M has a 84.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 566.7% more advanced lithography process, and 220% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 680M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 460 v2 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 460 v2 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon 680M 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 v2
GeForce GTX 460 v2
AMD Radeon 680M
Radeon 680M

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.


3.9 20 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 460 v2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1110 votes

Rate Radeon 680M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 460 v2 or Radeon 680M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.