AMD Radeon Pro 460 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 460 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 represent two distinct eras of GPU design. The Radeon Pro 460 is a modern, power-efficient mobile and integrated-class part built on a 14 nm process, while the GTX 580 is a legacy high-end desktop card from the Fermi generation on a 40 nm process. The recorded data shows a remarkably close contest in one compute benchmark, despite their architectural differences. This analysis draws exclusively from the database entries for both parts.

FAQ

Q: How do the two cards compare in the only benchmark they share, Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 460 scores 15,284, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 scores 15,283. The delta is 0%, with the AMD card declared the winner by a single point. This is effectively a tie in raw compute throughput.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The Radeon Pro 460 has an average benchmark score of 17,509 across three tests (Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan). The GTX 580 has an average score of 15,283, based solely on its Geekbench OpenCL result.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The Radeon Pro 460 sits at the 61st percentile, while the GTX 580 is at the 58th percentile. This places the AMD part slightly higher in the overall performance distribution.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The Radeon Pro 460 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 81.28 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 580 has 1536 MB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, providing 192.4 GB/s.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The GTX 580 achieves 24.70 GPixel/s, which is significantly higher than the Radeon Pro 460’s 14.51 GPixel/s. This is due to the GTX 580’s 48 ROPs versus the AMD card’s 16 ROPs.

Q: What are the thermal and power characteristics?

A: The Radeon Pro 460 has a TDP of 35 W and no power connectors, functioning as an integrated graphics processor (IGP). The GTX 580 has a TDP of 244 W, requires a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connector setup, and a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental design philosophies of these two GPUs are separated by nearly six years of silicon evolution. The AMD Radeon Pro 460 uses the Baffin chip, built on the GCN 4.0 architecture, and is manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 uses the GF110 chip, based on the Fermi 2.0 architecture, and is fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC.

Both chips contain exactly 3,000 million transistors, but the die sizes tell a different story. The Radeon Pro 460 packs those transistors into a 123 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 24.4 million per square millimeter. The GTX 580 spreads the same transistor count across a massive 520 mm² die, with a density of just 5.8 million per square millimeter. This density difference is a direct consequence of the process node gap and explains why the AMD part can operate at a fraction of the power draw.

The compute architecture diverges sharply. The Radeon Pro 460 features 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 580 has exactly half the shading units at 512, but matches the TMU count at 64 and triples the ROPs to 48. This configuration means the AMD card relies on a wider array of simpler cores, while the NVIDIA card has fewer, more powerful rasterization units.

Clock behavior differs fundamentally. The Radeon Pro 460 has a base clock of 850 MHz and a boost clock of 907 MHz, allowing dynamic frequency scaling. The GTX 580 has no recorded base or boost clocks in the database, indicating a fixed clock design. Memory clocks also differ: the AMD card runs at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective), while the GTX 580 operates at 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective).

The memory subsystem presents a clear trade-off. The Radeon Pro 460 offers 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, prioritizing capacity and efficiency. The GTX 580 offers 1536 MB on a 384-bit bus, prioritizing raw bandwidth. The NVIDIA card’s 192.4 GB/s bandwidth is more than double the AMD card’s 81.28 GB/s, but the AMD card carries more than 2.5 times the memory capacity.

API support shows the generational gap. The Radeon Pro 460 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The GTX 580 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no recorded Vulkan support. This means the AMD card is fully compatible with modern cross-platform graphics APIs, while the NVIDIA card is limited to older DirectX 12 feature levels and lacks Vulkan entirely.

The physical form factors are completely different. The Radeon Pro 460 is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and display outputs described as “Portable Device Dependent.” It is designed for laptops and compact systems. The GTX 580 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, with 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a outputs. It requires substantial power delivery and a 550 W suggested PSU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains exactly one shared benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The results are astonishingly close. The AMD Radeon Pro 460 scores 15,284, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 scores 15,283. The delta percentage is 0%, with the AMD card listed as the winner by a single point. This effectively represents a statistical dead heat in raw OpenCL compute performance.

This near-identical score is remarkable given the architectural approaches. The Radeon Pro 460 achieves its result with 1,024 shading units at 1.858 TFLOPS FP32, a 35 W TDP, and 81.28 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 580 achieves its result with 512 shading units at 1.581 TFLOPS FP32, a 244 W TDP, and 192.4 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card uses 18% more shading units and 17.5% higher FP32 throughput, but the NVIDIA card counters with 2.36 times the memory bandwidth. These opposing advantages cancel out almost perfectly in the OpenCL workload.

The AMD card’s additional benchmark scores provide context for its overall position. In Geekbench Metal, it scores 20,426, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 16,816. These results reflect its modern API support and driver maturity. The GTX 580 has no Metal or Vulkan results in the database, so a direct comparison in those tests is impossible.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the picture. The Radeon Pro 460 averages 17,509 across its three tests, placing it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs. The GTX 580 averages 15,283 from its single test, placing it in the 58th percentile. The AMD card’s average is 14.6% higher, driven by its strong Metal and Vulkan showings.

The nearest rivals in the database further contextualize these scores. The Radeon Pro 460 sits just 0.2% below the NVIDIA Tesla K40c (17,468), 0.2% above the AMD Radeon Pro 560 (17,551), and 0.7% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (17,639). The GTX 580 is exactly tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (15,290) at 0% delta, and sits 0.7% above the AMD Radeon RX 7600 (15,171).

Specification Differences

The following fields differ directly between the two cards:

• Process Node: AMD Radeon Pro 460 uses 14 nm (GlobalFoundries); NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 uses 40 nm (TSMC).
• Die Size: 123 mm² for the AMD card; 520 mm² for the NVIDIA card.
• Transistor Density: 24.4M / mm² versus 5.8M / mm².
• Base Clock: 850 MHz (AMD) versus none recorded (NVIDIA).
• Boost Clock: 907 MHz (AMD) versus none recorded (NVIDIA).
• Memory Clock: 1270 MHz / 5.1 Gbps effective (AMD) versus 1002 MHz / 4 Gbps effective (NVIDIA).
• Memory Size: 4 GB (AMD) versus 1536 MB (NVIDIA).
• Memory Bus Width: 128 bit (AMD) versus 384 bit (NVIDIA).
• Memory Bandwidth: 81.28 GB/s (AMD) versus 192.4 GB/s (NVIDIA).
• Shading Units: 1,024 (AMD) versus 512 (NVIDIA).
• ROPs: 16 (AMD) versus 48 (NVIDIA).
• Pixel Rate: 14.51 GPixel/s (AMD) versus 24.70 GPixel/s (NVIDIA).
• Texture Rate: 58.05 GTexel/s (AMD) versus 49.41 GTexel/s (NVIDIA).
• FP32: 1.858 TFLOPS (AMD) versus 1.581 TFLOPS (NVIDIA).
• FP16: 1.858 TFLOPS (1:1) for AMD; none recorded for NVIDIA.
• TDP: 35 W (AMD) versus 244 W (NVIDIA).
• Slot Width: IGP (AMD) versus Dual-slot (NVIDIA).
• Power Connectors: None (AMD) versus 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin (NVIDIA).
• Suggested PSU: None recorded (AMD) versus 550 W (NVIDIA).
• Bus Interface: PCIe 3.0 x8 (AMD) versus PCIe 2.0 x16 (NVIDIA).
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent (AMD) versus 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a (NVIDIA).
• Dimensions: None recorded for AMD; 267 mm length, 111 mm height for NVIDIA.
• DirectX Support: 12 (12_0) for AMD versus 12 (11_0) for NVIDIA.
• Vulkan Support: 1.3 for AMD versus none recorded for NVIDIA.
• Release Date: 2016-10-29 for AMD versus 2010-11-08 for NVIDIA.
• Predecessor/Successor: None recorded for AMD; GeForce 400 predecessor and GeForce 600 successor for NVIDIA.
• Launch MSRP: None recorded for AMD; 499 USD for NVIDIA.

The Verdict

The data defines a clear split between these two GPUs. For compute workloads measured by Geekbench OpenCL, the choice is effectively moot. The AMD Radeon Pro 460 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 produce identical scores of 15,284 and 15,283 respectively, a 0% delta. Neither card offers a meaningful advantage in this specific test.

For broader application support, the Radeon Pro 460 is the stronger candidate. It carries Vulkan 1.3 support, which the GTX 580 lacks entirely, and its DirectX 12 (12_0) feature level is a full tier above the GTX 580’s DirectX 12 (11_0). The AMD card also records results in Geekbench Metal and Vulkan, demonstrating functional drivers for modern APIs, while the GTX 580 has no such entries.

For efficiency, the comparison is one-sided. The Radeon Pro 460 operates at 35 W TDP with no external power connectors, making it suitable for portable and compact systems. The GTX 580 demands 244 W, a 6-pin and 8-pin power connector, a 550 W PSU, and a dual-slot chassis with 267 mm of clearance. The AMD card delivers comparable OpenCL performance at roughly one-seventh the power draw.

For memory capacity, the Radeon Pro 460 wins with 4 GB versus 1536 MB. However, the GTX 580 dominates in memory bandwidth at 192.4 GB/s versus 81.28 GB/s, and in pixel fill rate at 24.70 GPixel/s versus 14.51 GPixel/s. These advantages suggest the NVIDIA card would handle bandwidth-intensive rasterization workloads better, despite its lower FP32 throughput.

For overall percentile ranking, the Radeon Pro 460 sits in the 61st percentile versus the GTX 580’s 58th. The AMD card’s average benchmark score of 17,509 is 14.6% higher than the NVIDIA card’s 15,283, though this gap is driven entirely by the AMD card’s Metal and Vulkan results.

The verdict is stratified by use case. A system integrator prioritizing modern API compatibility, low power, and compact form factors should select the AMD Radeon Pro 460. A user with legacy software that relies on high memory bandwidth or fixed-clock Fermi-era performance might consider the GTX 580, but the data shows no compute advantage for it. The GTX 580’s only clear wins are in pixel rate and raw memory bandwidth, neither of which translates to a higher average benchmark score. The Radeon Pro 460 is the better-rounded part according to the recorded measurements.