Radeon RX 460 vs GeForce GTX 680

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 680 and Radeon RX 460, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 680
2012
2048 MB GDDR5, 195 Watt
14.44
+35.6%

GTX 680 outperforms RX 460 by a substantial 36% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking361434
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.971.12
Power efficiency5.089.73
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGK104Baffin
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date22 March 2012 (12 years ago)8 August 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 $86

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 680 has 165% better value for money than RX 460.

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 cores1536896
Core clock speed1006 MHz1090 MHz
Boost clock speed1058 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)195 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate135.467.20
Floating-point processing power3.25 TFLOPS2.15 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs12856

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length254 mm170 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone
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 amount2048 MB2 GB
Memory bus width256-bit GDDR5128 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.2 GB/s112.0 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.

Display ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI++
HDCP+-
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.

FreeSync-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.24.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
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. 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 680 14.44
+35.6%
RX 460 10.65

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 680 5567
+35.6%
RX 460 4105

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 680 10217
+18.8%
RX 460 8597

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.

GTX 680 7587
+33.1%
RX 460 5701

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 680 47130
+35.1%
RX 460 34892

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 680 247306
RX 460 307888
+24.5%

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:

900p45
+50%
30−35
−50%
Full HD74
+85%
40
−85%
1440p110−120
+34.1%
82
−34.1%
4K23
+15%
20
−15%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.742.15
1440p4.541.05
4K21.704.30

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−3%
34
+3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+42.4%
30−35
−42.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+36%
24−27
−36%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+30%
30−33
−30%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+32.4%
70−75
−32.4%
Hitman 3 27−30
+35%
20−22
−35%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+27.6%
55−60
−27.6%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+11.4%
44
−11.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+33.3%
30−33
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+16.9%
65−70
−16.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−63.6%
54
+63.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+114%
22
−114%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+36%
24−27
−36%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+25.8%
31
−25.8%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+32.4%
70−75
−32.4%
Hitman 3 27−30
+35%
20−22
−35%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+27.6%
55−60
−27.6%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+40%
35
−40%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+33.3%
30−33
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 94
+236%
27−30
−236%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+16.9%
65−70
−16.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+94.1%
17
−94.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+36%
24−27
−36%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+129%
41
−129%
Hitman 3 27−30
+35%
20−22
−35%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+106%
36
−106%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
−4.5%
23
+4.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+16.9%
65−70
−16.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+33.3%
30−33
−33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+36.4%
10−12
−36.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+51%
45−50
−51%
Hitman 3 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+16%
25
−16%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+66.7%
14−16
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+32.8%
65−70
−32.8%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+7.7%
13
−7.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Hitman 3 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+51.1%
45−50
−51.1%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
+33.3%
12
−33.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+46.2%
12−14
−46.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%

This is how GTX 680 and RX 460 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 680 is 50% faster in 900p
  • GTX 680 is 85% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 680 is 34% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 680 is 15% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 680 is 236% faster.
  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 460 is 64% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 680 is ahead in 69 tests (96%)
  • RX 460 is ahead in 3 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.44 10.65
Recency 22 March 2012 8 August 2016
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 195 Watt 75 Watt

GTX 680 has a 35.6% higher aggregate performance score.

RX 460, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 160% lower power consumption.

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


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 680
GeForce GTX 680
AMD Radeon RX 460
Radeon RX 460

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.


3.8 580 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 1040 votes

Rate Radeon RX 460 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.