AMD Radeon 550X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 Comparison

The AMD Radeon 550X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 represent two distinct eras of GPU design, separated by nearly eight years of architectural evolution. The benchmark data shows a narrow overall margin in favor of the AMD part, but the story is far more complex than a simple average score. The Radeon 550X edges out the GTX 460 v2 in raw compute benchmarks, yet the older NVIDIA card retains advantages in specific throughput metrics that reveal its different design priorities.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available between these two cards is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this single head-to-head matchup, the AMD Radeon 550X scores 8866 points against the GTX 460 v2’s 8743 points. That difference translates to a 1.4% victory for the AMD card. While the margin is slim, it is consistent with the overall average benchmark scores, where the Radeon 550X posts 8918 points compared to 8743 for the NVIDIA card.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the Radeon 550X sits at the 45th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 460 v2 lands at the 44th percentile. This one-percentile gap mirrors the 1.4% head-to-head delta. The Radeon 550X’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8863 average score, 0.6% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (9022 average score, 1.2% ahead). The GTX 460 v2, meanwhile, trades blows with the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (8686 average score, 0.7% behind) and the same AMD Radeon R9 M265X (8851 average score, 1.2% behind).

The single OpenCL result tells a tale of near-parity in general compute workloads. However, the FP32 throughput numbers reveal a different picture. The Radeon 550X delivers 1,247.2 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is roughly 19% higher than the GTX 460 v2’s 1,046.3 GFLOPS. This suggests the AMD card should pull ahead in compute-heavy tasks, yet the actual benchmark delta is much smaller. The reason becomes apparent when examining texture and pixel rates, where the NVIDIA card’s wider memory bus and higher TMU count compensate for its lower shader throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 550X wins in aggregate compute performance and modern API support. Its FP32 output of 1,247.2 GFLOPS gives it a clear edge in shader-bound workloads, and its support for Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0) means it can handle contemporary graphics APIs natively. The GTX 460 v2, by contrast, lacks Vulkan support entirely and only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0) feature level. For any modern game or application that leverages these newer APIs, the Radeon 550X is the only viable choice between the two.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 wins in raw texture throughput and pixel fill rate. Its texture rate of 43.62 GTexel/s exceeds the Radeon 550X’s 38.98 GTexel/s by roughly 12%. Similarly, its pixel rate of 10.91 GPixel/s appears lower than the Radeon’s 19.49 GPixel/s, but this is misleading because the NVIDIA card achieves its rate with fewer ROPs operating at higher efficiency per clock. The GTX 460 v2 also has a wider memory bus at 192-bit versus 128-bit, which helps in bandwidth-sensitive scenarios despite its lower peak bandwidth of 96.19 GB/s versus 112.0 GB/s for the AMD card.

The GTX 460 v2 also wins on memory latency characteristics due to its larger cache hierarchy relative to its transistor budget. While the Radeon 550X has higher peak bandwidth, the NVIDIA card’s 24 ROPs and 56 TMUs give it an advantage in legacy DirectX 9 and DirectX 11 workloads that were optimized for Fermi’s architecture. For older game titles from the early 2010s, the GTX 460 v2’s design is often better suited.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark. The AMD Radeon 550X uses the Lexa chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This modern node packs 2,200 million transistors into a 103 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 21.4M per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, in contrast, uses the GF114 chip on the Fermi 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC’s 40 nm process. That older node requires a 332 mm² die to house 1,950 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of just 5.9M per mm².

The core configurations reflect these philosophical differences. The Radeon 550X has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 460 v2 has only 336 shading units but compensates with 56 TMUs and 24 ROPs. This means NVIDIA’s card dedicates more silicon to texture and pixel processing, while AMD’s card focuses on raw shader throughput. The Radeon’s FP16 performance matches its FP32 at 1,247.2 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the GTX 460 v2 has no FP16 capability listed.

Memory subsystems differ significantly as well. The Radeon 550X uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 460 v2 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, achieving 96.19 GB/s. Clock speeds also diverge, with the AMD card running at 1082 MHz base and 1218 MHz boost, while the NVIDIA card’s memory runs at 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The Radeon’s boost clock is a major advantage, allowing it to exceed its base performance under load.

Power and interface differences are equally pronounced. The Radeon 550X has a 50 W TDP with no power connectors and requires only a 250 W PSU. The GTX 460 v2 draws 160 W, needs two 6-pin connectors, and demands a 450 W PSU. The Radeon also uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the GTX 460 v2 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs reflect their respective eras: the AMD card offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the NVIDIA card provides 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 550X has an average benchmark score of 8918, which is 2% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2’s 8743.

Q: Does the GTX 460 v2 support Vulkan?

A: No, the GTX 460 v2 has no Vulkan support listed, while the Radeon 550X supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between these two cards?

A: The Radeon 550X has a transistor density of 21.4M per mm², which is approximately 3.6 times higher than the GTX 460 v2’s 5.9M per mm².

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare?

A: The Radeon 550X offers 112.0 GB/s bandwidth on a 128-bit bus, while the GTX 460 v2 provides 96.19 GB/s on a wider 192-bit bus.

Q: Which card has a higher texture fill rate?

A: The GTX 460 v2 has the higher texture rate at 43.62 GTexel/s, compared to 38.98 GTexel/s for the Radeon 550X.

Q: What is the release date gap between these products?

A: The GTX 460 v2 was released on 2011-09-23, while the Radeon 550X launched on 2019-03-26, a gap of roughly 7.5 years.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 550X | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Fermi 2.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 40 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 2,200 million | 1,950 million |

| Die Size | 103 mm² | 332 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 21.4M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1082 MHz | Not specified |

| Boost Clock | 1218 MHz | Not specified |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) | 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 96.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 336 |

| TMUs | 32 | 56 |

| ROPs | 16 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 19.49 GPixel/s | 10.91 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 38.98 GTexel/s | 43.62 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,247.2 GFLOPS | 1,046.3 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1,247.2 GFLOPS (1:1) | Not listed |

| TDP | 50 W | 160 W |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | Not listed |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a |

| Length | 145 mm (5.7 inches) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) |

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates a clear choice for modern workloads: the AMD Radeon 550X is the superior card for contemporary applications. Its 1.4% lead in the OpenCL head-to-head, combined with 19% higher FP32 throughput and full support for Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0), makes it the functional option for anyone running current software. The 2 GB memory capacity, double that of the GTX 460 v2, also provides more headroom for modern texture sets.

However, the GTX 460 v2 is not without merit in specific scenarios. Its higher texture rate (43.62 GTexel/s vs 38.98 GTexel/s) and wider memory bus (192-bit vs 128-bit) give it advantages in legacy DirectX 11 titles that were designed around Fermi’s strengths. For retro gaming or older application workloads, the NVIDIA card can outperform the AMD part despite its lower average benchmark score.

The power consumption difference is decisive for system builders. The Radeon 550X’s 50 W TDP with no power connectors and 250 W PSU requirement makes it far easier to integrate into compact or low-power systems. The GTX 460 v2 demands 160 W, two 6-pin connectors, and a 450 W PSU, limiting its compatibility with modern small-form-factor builds. The Radeon 550X also occupies less physical space at 145 mm versus 210 mm.

Ultimately, the data points to the Radeon 550X as the recommended purchase for virtually all use cases. It wins the only direct benchmark comparison, offers better API support, consumes less power, and provides more memory. The GTX 460 v2 retains niche appeal for those specifically targeting early-2010s software that favored its texture-heavy design, but the Radeon’s architectural advantages are too substantial to overlook. The 1.4% benchmark delta understates the real-world gap in modern applications where the AMD card’s feature set and efficiency make the difference.