Radeon 760M vs GeForce GTX 460

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 460 with Radeon 760M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 460
2010
2 GB GDDR5, 160 Watt
5.86

Radeon 760M outperforms GTX 460 by a whopping 161% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking561326
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.00no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)RDNA 3
GPU code nameGF104Phoenix
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date12 July 2010 (13 years ago)5 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data
Current price$128 (0.6x MSRP)no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores336512
Core clock speed675 MHz1500 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2800 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt54 Watt (35 - 54 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate37.8067.20
Floating-point performance907.2 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 460 and Radeon 760M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Bus support16x PCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length8.25"(210 mm) (21 cm)no data
Height4.376"(111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors6-pin & 6-pinNone
SLI options+no data

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 amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width192 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed3600 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth86.4 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data+

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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMIPortable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+no data
HDCP+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.14.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 5.86
Radeon 760M 15.29
+161%

Radeon 760M outperforms GeForce GTX 460 by 161% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 460 2262
Radeon 760M 5906
+161%

Radeon 760M outperforms GeForce GTX 460 by 161% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 460 2570
Radeon 760M 6142
+139%

Radeon 760M outperforms GeForce GTX 460 by 139% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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 HD10−12
−210%
31
+210%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−200%
30
+200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−210%
30−35
+210%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
−178%
24−27
+178%
Battlefield 5 18−20
−178%
50−55
+178%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−210%
30−35
+210%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−167%
24
+167%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−200%
35−40
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
−163%
40−45
+163%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−167%
70−75
+167%
Hitman 3 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−190%
60−65
+190%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−183%
50−55
+183%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−169%
40−45
+169%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
−183%
51
+183%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
−172%
45−50
+172%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−210%
30−35
+210%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
−178%
24−27
+178%
Battlefield 5 18−20
−178%
50−55
+178%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−210%
30−35
+210%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−200%
18
+200%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−200%
35−40
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
−163%
40−45
+163%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−167%
70−75
+167%
Hitman 3 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−190%
60−65
+190%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−183%
50−55
+183%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−169%
40−45
+169%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−175%
44
+175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−200%
36
+200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
−172%
45−50
+172%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−210%
30−35
+210%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
−178%
24−27
+178%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−210%
30−35
+210%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−167%
24−27
+167%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−200%
35−40
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−167%
70−75
+167%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−190%
60−65
+190%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−164%
37
+164%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−188%
23
+188%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
−172%
45−50
+172%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−169%
40−45
+169%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
−180%
27−30
+180%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−200%
14−16
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−171%
18−20
+171%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−178%
24−27
+178%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−190%
27−30
+190%
Hitman 3 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−210%
30−35
+210%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−170%
27−30
+170%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−180%
27−30
+180%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−167%
16−18
+167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−178%
24−27
+178%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−200%
14−16
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%
Hitman 3 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−167%
16−18
+167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 2−3
Far Cry 5 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−163%
21−24
+163%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−167%
16−18
+167%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−200%
14−16
+200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%

This is how GTX 460 and Radeon 760M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 760M is 210% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.86 15.29
Recency 12 July 2010 5 January 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 54 Watt

The Radeon 760M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 460 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 460 is a desktop card while Radeon 760M is a notebook one.


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
GeForce GTX 460
AMD Radeon 760M
Radeon 760M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.4 942 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 108 votes

Rate Radeon 760M 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.