RX 460 vs R9 270X

#ad
Buy
VS
#ad
Buy

Combined performance score

R9 270X
12.61
+19.1%

R9 270X outperforms RX 460 by 19% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking362393
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money4.421.36
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)Polaris (2016−2019)
GPU code nameCuracao XTPolaris 11 / Baffin XT
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (10 years old)8 August 2016 (7 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $86
Current price$136 (0.7x MSRP)$397 (4.6x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 270X has 225% better value for money than RX 460.

Technical specs

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 cores1280896
Core clock speedno data1090 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate84.0067.20
Floating-point performance2,688 gflops2,150 gflops

Size and 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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Lengthno data170 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2 x 6-pinNone

Memory

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 amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data7000 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s112.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+no data
HDMI++
DisplayPort support+no data

Technologies

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

AppAcceleration+no data
CrossFire1no data
Enduro-no data
FreeSync1+
HD3D+no data
LiquidVR1no data
PowerTune-no data
TressFX1no data
TrueAudio+no data
ZeroCore-no data
UVD+no data
DDMA audio+no data

API support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
Mantle-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.

R9 270X 12.61
+19.1%
RX 460 10.59

R9 270X outperforms RX 460 by 19% in our combined 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%

R9 270X 4889
+19.1%
RX 460 4104

R9 270X outperforms RX 460 by 19% 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%

R9 270X 6560
+15.1%
RX 460 5701

R9 270X outperforms RX 460 by 15% 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 HD45−50
+9.8%
41
−9.8%
1440p65−70
+18.2%
55
−18.2%
4K21−24
+5%
20
−5%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
−25.9%
34
+25.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+19.4%
35−40
−19.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+17.9%
27−30
−17.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−21.2%
40
+21.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
−20.6%
41
+20.6%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−26.7%
57
+26.7%
Hitman 3 30−35
+25.9%
27−30
−25.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+18.2%
21−24
−18.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−61.9%
34
+61.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−30.8%
34
+30.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
+21.1%
18−20
−21.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
−3.7%
28
+3.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+19.4%
35−40
−19.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+106%
16
−106%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−12.1%
37
+12.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
−11.8%
38
+11.8%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−20%
54
+20%
Hitman 3 30−35
+25.9%
27−30
−25.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+18.2%
21−24
−18.2%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−10.5%
21
+10.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+23.5%
17
−23.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−7.7%
28
+7.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−42.3%
37
+42.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
+21.1%
18−20
−21.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+58.8%
17
−58.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+19.4%
35−40
−19.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−3%
34
+3%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
−2.9%
35
+2.9%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+9.8%
41
−9.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+13%
23
−13%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
+21.1%
18−20
−21.1%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Hitman 3 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+31.6%
18−20
−31.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+17.6%
16−18
−17.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+22.2%
18−20
−22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+26.3%
18−20
−26.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Hitman 3 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−9.1%
12
+9.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−10%
11
+10%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+8.3%
12
−8.3%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+30.8%
12−14
−30.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

This is how R9 270X and RX 460 compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • R9 270X is 9.8% faster than RX 460

1440p resolution:

  • R9 270X is 18.2% faster than RX 460

4K resolution:

  • R9 270X is 5% faster than RX 460

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

  • in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 270X is 106% faster than the RX 460.
  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 460 is 61.9% faster than the R9 270X.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 270X is ahead in 50 tests (74%)
  • RX 460 is ahead in 17 tests (25%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 12.61 10.59
Recency 8 October 2013 8 August 2016
Cost $199 $86
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 75 Watt

The Radeon R9 270X 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.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R9 270X
Radeon R9 270X
AMD Radeon RX 460
Radeon RX 460

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

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


4 692 votes

Rate AMD Radeon R9 270X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 879 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.