AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 are both end-of-life graphics cards, yet they represent two very different eras of GPU design. In the single head-to-head benchmark available, the older Fermi-based GTX 460 emerges victorious, but the data reveals a more complex picture regarding efficiency, features, and modern API support. The GTX 460 scores 7,925 points in Geekbench OpenCL, while the WX 3100 scores 7,333 points, giving the NVIDIA card an 8.1% lead. However, the WX 3100 counters with a Vulkan score of 7,827 and a significantly lower power draw, making it a more versatile option for modern workflows despite losing the direct comparison.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 outscores the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 by 8.1%. This is a decisive win for the older card, with scores of 7,925 versus 7,333. The GTX 460’s victory is notable given its age and smaller memory footprint; it achieves this with 336 shading units and a 192-bit memory bus, whereas the WX 3100 uses 512 shading units on a 128-bit bus. The result suggests that the GTX 460’s higher memory bandwidth of 86.40 GB/s, combined with its 56 texture mapping units, provides a tangible advantage in compute workloads that are sensitive to memory throughput.

The WX 3100 does not win any head-to-head benchmarks, but its Vulkan score of 7,827 is worth attention. While this is not a direct comparison to the GTX 460 (which has no Vulkan score in the data), it indicates that the AMD card is capable of strong performance in modern APIs. The GTX 460’s OpenCL score places it in the 41st percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7,925. The WX 3100 also sits in the 41st percentile, but its average score across two benchmarks is 7,580, reflecting the lower OpenCL result. In the broader rival landscape, the GTX 460 sits within 1.6% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti (8,053) and 1.4% behind the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 (8,039), showing it is competitive with much newer mid-range parts. The WX 3100, meanwhile, is within 1.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7,472) and 1.2% of the AMD Radeon 540 (7,673), indicating it holds its own against entry-level modern cards.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is vast. The GTX 460 is built on NVIDIA’s Fermi architecture, using the GF104 chip manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. In contrast, the WX 3100 uses AMD’s GCN 4.0 architecture with the Lexa chip, fabricated on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries. This process difference is stark: the GTX 460 packs 1,950 million transistors into a 332 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.9 million per square millimeter. The WX 3100 integrates 2,200 million transistors into just 103 mm², achieving a density of 21.4 million per square millimeter—roughly 3.6 times denser. This explains why the newer card consumes far less power: the GTX 460 has a 160 W TDP, while the WX 3100 draws only 65 W.

Memory configurations also diverge significantly. The GTX 460 comes with 768 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 86.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The WX 3100 offers 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, which yields 96.00 GB/s—about 11% more bandwidth despite the narrower interface. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the GTX 460’s memory runs at 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective), while the WX 3100’s memory runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective). The WX 3100 also has explicit base and boost clocks of 925 MHz and 1219 MHz, respectively, whereas the GTX 460 has no listed base or boost clock.

Compute capabilities are another differentiator. The GTX 460 offers 907.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the WX 3100 delivers 1,248.3 GFLOPS—roughly 37% higher. The WX 3100 also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (1,248.3 GFLOPS), a feature entirely absent from the GTX 460. Pixel and texture rates favor the newer card: the WX 3100 achieves 19.50 GPixel/s and 39.01 GTexel/s, versus 9.450 GPixel/s and 37.80 GTexel/s for the GTX 460. The GTX 460 does have more ROPs (24 versus 16) and more TMUs (56 versus 32), but the WX 3100’s higher clocks compensate.

API support is a major generational leap. The GTX 460 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed. The WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. This makes the AMD card far more compatible with modern software. The GTX 460 uses a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, while the WX 3100 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, which offers higher per-lane bandwidth but fewer lanes. Physical design also differs: the GTX 460 is a dual-slot card measuring 210 mm (8.3 inches) with two 6-pin power connectors, while the WX 3100 is single-slot, 168 mm (6.6 inches) long, and requires no external power connectors.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: the GTX 460 wins raw compute performance in OpenCL, but the WX 3100 is the more future-proof and efficient choice. If the sole criterion is peak OpenCL throughput, the GTX 460 is the winner—its 8.1% lead in the head-to-head is definitive, and it outperforms the WX 3100’s average score by 4.5% (7,925 versus 7,580). However, the WX 3100’s Vulkan support, FP16 capability, and dramatically lower power draw (65 W versus 160 W) make it a better fit for modern workloads that leverage these features. The GTX 460’s lack of Vulkan support is a severe limitation, as many current applications and games rely on it.

For users prioritizing legacy OpenCL compute, the GTX 460 is the pick. For those needing modern API compatibility, higher memory capacity (4 GB versus 768 MB), and lower power consumption, the WX 3100 is the obvious choice. The GTX 460’s 768 MB memory is a bottleneck for many modern tasks, while the WX 3100’s 4 GB provides ample headroom. The WX 3100 also offers a single-slot, low-profile design with no power connectors, making it far easier to install in small form-factor systems. Neither card is competitive at the top of the range—both sit in the 41st percentile—but they serve different niches.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 |

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

| Architecture | Fermi | GCN 4.0 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 14 nm |

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

| Die Size | 332 mm² | 103 mm² |

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

| Memory Size | 768 MB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 86.40 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 336 | 512 |

| TMUs | 56 | 32 |

| ROPs | 24 | 16 |

| FP32 Performance | 907.2 GFLOPS | 1,248.3 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | N/A | 1,248.3 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 9.450 GPixel/s | 19.50 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 37.80 GTexel/s | 39.01 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 160 W | 65 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 250 W |

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

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

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

| Vulkan Support | N/A | 1.3 |

| Dimensions (Length) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | 168 mm (6.6 inches) |

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 is faster, scoring 7,925 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 7,333 for the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, an 8.1% advantage.

Q: Does the GTX 460 support Vulkan?

A: No, the GTX 460 has no Vulkan support listed. The WX 3100 supports Vulkan 1.3, making it the only choice for Vulkan-based applications.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The GTX 460 has 768 MB of GDDR5, while the WX 3100 has 4 GB of GDDR5. The WX 3100’s larger pool is better suited for modern workloads.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The GTX 460 has a TDP of 160 W and requires two 6-pin power connectors, while the WX 3100 has a 65 W TDP and needs no external power connectors.

Q: Which card has higher FP32 performance?

A: The WX 3100 delivers 1,248.3 GFLOPS, which is about 37% higher than the GTX 460’s 907.2 GFLOPS.

Q: Are both cards in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both cards sit in the 41st percentile of all GPUs, though the GTX 460 has a higher average benchmark score (7,925) versus the WX 3100’s 7,580.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 460 wins in the only direct head-to-head test: Geekbench OpenCL. It also holds a higher average benchmark score (7,925 versus 7,580) and a larger memory bus (192-bit versus 128-bit), which can be advantageous in bandwidth-sensitive tasks. Its 56 TMUs and 24 ROPs provide strong texturing and pixel throughput for its era, and its launch MSRP was 199 USD. The GTX 460 is best suited for legacy compute tasks where OpenCL performance is the sole metric and power consumption is not a concern.

The WX 3100 wins in every other measurable category that matters for modern use. It offers 4 GB of memory versus 768 MB, higher memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s versus 86.40 GB/s), and significantly higher pixel rate (19.50 GPixel/s versus 9.450 GPixel/s) and texture rate (39.01 GTexel/s versus 37.80 GTexel/s). Its FP32 performance is 37% higher, and it adds FP16 support at a 1:1 ratio. The 65 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors make it ideal for compact or low-power systems. Vulkan 1.3 support and DirectX 12 (12_0) ensure compatibility with contemporary software, while its PCIe 3.0 x8 interface and modern display outputs (DisplayPort 1.4a) round out a more versatile package. The WX 3100 is the winner for users who need a low-profile, efficient card that can handle modern API workloads and larger datasets.