GeForce GTX 765M vs Radeon RX 460

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

RX 460
2016
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
10.62
+106%

Radeon RX 460 outperforms GeForce GTX 765M by a whopping 106% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking400586
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.200.53
ArchitecturePolaris (2016−2019)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code namePolaris 11 / Baffin XTN14-GE
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date8 August 2016 (7 years ago)30 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86 no data
Current price$397 (4.6x MSRP)$93

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 460 has 126% better value for money than GTX 765M.

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 cores896768
CUDA coresno data768
Core clock speed1090 MHz850 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHz863 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate67.2055.23
Floating-point performance2,150 gflops1,326 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon RX 460 and GeForce GTX 765M 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.

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8MXM-B (3.0)
Length170 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
SLI optionsno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataGDDR5
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed7000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth112.0 GB/s64.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
eDP 1.2 signal supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
LVDS signal supportno dataUp to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display supportno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
HDMI++
HDCP content protectionno data+
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMIno data+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreamingno data+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+no data
Blu-Ray 3D Supportno data+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoderno data+
Optimusno data+
3D Vision / 3DTV Playno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 API
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDAno 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.

RX 460 10.62
+106%
GTX 765M 5.16

Radeon RX 460 outperforms GeForce GTX 765M by 106% 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%

RX 460 4102
+106%
GTX 765M 1993

Radeon RX 460 outperforms GeForce GTX 765M by 106% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

RX 460 8597
+114%
GTX 765M 4019

Radeon RX 460 outperforms GeForce GTX 765M by 114% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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%

RX 460 5701
+130%
GTX 765M 2479

Radeon RX 460 outperforms GeForce GTX 765M by 130% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

RX 460 34892
+98.1%
GTX 765M 17616

Radeon RX 460 outperforms GeForce GTX 765M by 98% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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:

900p100−110
+96.1%
51
−96.1%
Full HD42
−2.4%
43
+2.4%
1440p83
+108%
40−45
−108%
4K20
+122%
9−10
−122%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 34
+240%
10−11
−240%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+154%
12−14
−154%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+90.9%
10−12
−90.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+127%
10−12
−127%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%
Forza Horizon 4 57
+138%
24−27
−138%
Hitman 3 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 138
+431%
24−27
−431%
Metro Exodus 44
+340%
10−11
−340%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+83.3%
18−20
−83.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+60.9%
21−24
−60.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 28
+180%
10−11
−180%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Battlefield 5 22
+69.2%
12−14
−69.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+90.9%
10−12
−90.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+127%
10−12
−127%
Far Cry New Dawn 31
+121%
14−16
−121%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+113%
24−27
−113%
Hitman 3 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+69.2%
24−27
−69.2%
Metro Exodus 36
+260%
10−11
−260%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+83.3%
18−20
−83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 37
+236%
10−12
−236%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+60.9%
21−24
−60.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 17
+70%
10−11
−70%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+90.9%
10−12
−90.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+127%
10−12
−127%
Forza Horizon 4 41
+70.8%
24−27
−70.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 36
+38.5%
24−27
−38.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+83.3%
18−20
−83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
+109%
10−12
−109%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+60.9%
21−24
−60.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+122%
9−10
−122%
Hitman 3 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 25
+108%
12−14
−108%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 13
+225%
4−5
−225%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Hitman 3 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+1100%
1−2
−1100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Horizon Zero Dawn 13
+160%
5−6
−160%
Metro Exodus 12
+100%
6−7
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%

This is how RX 460 and GTX 765M compete in popular games:

  • RX 460 is 96% faster in 900p
  • GTX 765M is 2% faster in 1080p
  • RX 460 is 108% faster in 1440p
  • RX 460 is 122% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 460 is 1100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, RX 460 surpassed GTX 765M in all 69 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.62 5.16
Recency 8 August 2016 30 May 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm

The Radeon RX 460 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 765M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 460 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 765M 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.


AMD Radeon RX 460
Radeon RX 460
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M
GeForce GTX 765M

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.


3.9 909 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 66 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 765M 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.