Radeon RX 460 vs Quadro P4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P4000 with Radeon RX 460, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P4000
2017
8 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
29.41
+182%

P4000 outperforms RX 460 by a whopping 182% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking197439
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation17.611.12
Power efficiency19.699.76
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGP104Baffin
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date6 February 2017 (8 years ago)8 August 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$815 $86

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

Quadro P4000 has 1472% 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 cores1792896
Core clock speed1202 MHz1090 MHz
Boost clock speed1480 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate165.867.20
Floating-point processing power5.304 TFLOPS2.15 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs11256

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 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length241 mm170 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1901 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth192 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 Connectors4x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+
Display Port1.4no data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+
Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA6.1-

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.

Quadro P4000 29.41
+182%
RX 460 10.42

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.

Quadro P4000 11572
+182%
RX 460 4101

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 HD68
+61.9%
42
−61.9%
1440p140−150
+180%
50
−180%
4K55−60
+175%
20
−175%

Cost per frame, $

1080p11.99
−485%
2.05
+485%
1440p5.82
−238%
1.72
+238%
4K14.82
−245%
4.30
+245%
  • RX 460 has 485% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 460 has 238% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 460 has 245% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 80−85
+220%
24−27
−220%
Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+222%
18
−222%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+210%
20−22
−210%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 80−85
+220%
24−27
−220%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+143%
40−45
−143%
Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+222%
18−20
−222%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+210%
20−22
−210%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+130%
40
−130%
Fortnite 130−140
+13.8%
116
−13.8%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+94.7%
57
−94.7%
Forza Horizon 5 80−85
+212%
24−27
−212%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+211%
36
−211%
Valorant 180−190
+93.6%
90−95
−93.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 80−85
+220%
24−27
−220%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+143%
40−45
−143%
Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+222%
18−20
−222%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+80%
150−160
−80%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+210%
20−22
−210%
Dota 2 130−140
+84.5%
70−75
−84.5%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+149%
37
−149%
Fortnite 130−140
+238%
39
−238%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+106%
54
−106%
Forza Horizon 5 80−85
+212%
24−27
−212%
Grand Theft Auto V 100−105
+186%
35
−186%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+205%
21
−205%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+300%
28
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 77
+108%
37
−108%
Valorant 180−190
+93.6%
90−95
−93.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+143%
40−45
−143%
Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+480%
10
−480%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+210%
20−22
−210%
Dota 2 130−140
+84.5%
70−75
−84.5%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+171%
34
−171%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+171%
41
−171%
Forza Horizon 5 80−85
+212%
24−27
−212%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+460%
20
−460%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 41
+78.3%
23
−78.3%
Valorant 180−190
+93.6%
90−95
−93.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 130−140
+326%
31
−326%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
+157%
75−80
−157%
Grand Theft Auto V 50−55
+279%
14−16
−279%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+255%
10−12
−255%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+250%
50−55
−250%
Valorant 220−230
+99.1%
110−120
−99.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+208%
24−27
−208%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+214%
21−24
−214%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+213%
24−27
−213%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+178%
18−20
−178%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+206%
16−18
−206%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 65−70
+229%
21−24
−229%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+162%
21−24
−162%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+300%
6−7
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+258%
12
−258%
Valorant 160−170
+217%
50−55
−217%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+267%
12−14
−267%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Dota 2 85−90
+141%
35−40
−141%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+209%
11
−209%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+194%
16−18
−194%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+250%
8−9
−250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+256%
9−10
−256%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+256%
9−10
−256%

This is how Quadro P4000 and RX 460 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P4000 is 62% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P4000 is 180% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro P4000 is 175% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P4000 is 480% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Quadro P4000 surpassed RX 460 in all 67 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 29.41 10.42
Recency 6 February 2017 8 August 2016
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 75 Watt

Quadro P4000 has a 182.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 months, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RX 460, on the other hand, has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 33.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 460 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P4000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 460 is a desktop 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 Quadro P4000
Quadro P4000
AMD Radeon RX 460
Radeon RX 460

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.


4 312 votes

Rate Quadro P4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 1060 votes

Rate Radeon RX 460 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P4000 or Radeon RX 460, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.