AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 are separated by five years of GPU architecture evolution, yet benchmark data places them within 1.4% of each other in average score. The WX 5100 is a professional Polaris-based card from 2016, while the GTX 460 v2 is a Fermi-era consumer part from 2011. The data reveals a fascinating clash where modern efficiency and feature support meet an older, simpler design that still holds its own in overall standings.

FAQ

Q: How do the two cards compare in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 has an average benchmark score of 8863, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 scores 8743. The delta between them is 1.4% in favor of the AMD card, making them statistically near-identical in overall performance.

Q: Which card wins in the only head-to-head benchmark available?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 24217 versus the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2's 8743. This represents a 177% delta, a massive victory for the AMD card in compute workloads.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 contains 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 has 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die. This gives the AMD chip a transistor density of 24.6M per mm² versus 5.9M per mm² for the NVIDIA chip.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 features 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 96.19 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the power requirements differ?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 has a TDP of 75 W and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 has a TDP of 160 W, needs 2x 6-pin power connectors, and suggests a 450 W PSU.

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

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 was released on 2016-11-17, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 came out on 2011-09-23. This represents roughly five years of technological advancement between their launches.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 uses the GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 relies on Fermi 2.0 on a 40 nm process from TSMC. This process difference is the primary driver of the dramatic transistor density gap: 24.6M transistors per mm² for the AMD chip versus 5.9M per mm² for the NVIDIA chip.

The AMD card's Ellesmere chip packs 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. In contrast, the NVIDIA GF114 chip contains 336 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The AMD card's shading unit count is more than five times higher, though the NVIDIA card's architecture operates differently with its Fermi design.

Memory architecture differs significantly. The WX 5100 offers 8 GB of GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus and 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 460 v2 provides only 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 96.19 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card's memory clock runs at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) versus 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for the NVIDIA card.

Feature support shows a clear generational split. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but has no Vulkan support listed. Display outputs also differ: AMD provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while NVIDIA offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a.

The bus interface also differs, with the AMD card using PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 2.0 x16 for the NVIDIA card. The power delivery systems are equally divergent — the WX 5100 is a single-slot card with no power connectors, while the GTX 460 v2 is a dual-slot card requiring 2x 6-pin connectors. The physical dimensions reflect this: the AMD card measures 173 mm in length, while the NVIDIA card is 210 mm long.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single head-to-head benchmark available paints a one-sided picture. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 achieves a score of 24217 against the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2's 8743. This 177% delta is enormous, indicating that the AMD card is nearly three times faster in this compute-oriented workload. The OpenCL result likely reflects the AMD card's vastly higher FP32 throughput of 3.892 TFLOPS versus 1,046.3 GFLOPS for the NVIDIA card.

The overall average benchmark scores tell a different story, however. The WX 5100 averages 8863 across all its benchmarks, while the GTX 460 v2 averages 8743 from a single OpenCL test. The delta here is only 1.4%, meaning the NVIDIA card's average is derived from just one score while the AMD card's average includes multiple tests spanning DirectX 9 through 12, G2D, and G3D workloads.

The AMD card's individual benchmark results show strength in compute tasks: Geekbench Metal scores 29003, Geekbench Vulkan scores 26909, and Passmark GPU Compute scores 2053. In DirectX tests, the AMD card scores 88 in DirectX 9, 36 in DirectX 11, 29 in DirectX 10, and 26 in DirectX 12. The Passmark G3D score is 5496, with a G2D score of 777. These numbers reveal that the AMD card performs best in modern API workloads while showing lower legacy DirectX performance.

When comparing to the nearest rivals list, both cards sit at the 44th percentile of all GPUs. The WX 5100's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon R9 M265X with a 0.1% delta, followed by the AMD Radeon 550X at -0.6% and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile at 1.3%. The GTX 460 v2's nearest rival is the RTX 3050 A Mobile at 0% delta, then the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 at 0.7%, and the R9 M265X at -1.2%. Both cards directly rival each other, with deltas of 1.4% and -1.4% respectively.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 |

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

| Process Node | 14 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 5,700 million | 1,950 million |

| Die Size | 232 mm² | 332 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.6M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 713 MHz | Not specified |

| Boost Clock | 1086 MHz | Not specified |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 96.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 336 |

| TMUs | 112 | 56 |

| ROPs | 32 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 34.75 GPixel/s | 10.91 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 121.6 GTexel/s | 43.62 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.892 TFLOPS | 1,046.3 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.892 TFLOPS (1:1) | Not specified |

| TDP | 75 W | 160 W |

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

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

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 450 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | Not specified |

| Length | 173 mm (6.8 inches) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) |

The Verdict

The data shows a clear split between compute performance and overall standings. In OpenCL compute, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 delivers a 177% advantage over the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, making it the definitive choice for compute-heavy workloads. However, the average benchmark scores place both cards within 1.4% of each other, suggesting that in real-world gaming scenarios where legacy DirectX titles dominate, the GTX 460 v2 may still compete effectively.

The AMD card's 8 GB memory capacity, 1792 shading units, and 3.892 TFLOPS FP32 performance make it vastly more capable for modern workloads. The NVIDIA card's 1024 MB memory and 336 shading units are severely limited by comparison, yet its average score of 8743 demonstrates that older architecture can still produce respectable results in certain tests.

The power envelope strongly favors the AMD card. At 75 W TDP with no external power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU, the WX 5100 offers dramatically better efficiency than the GTX 460 v2's 160 W TDP with 2x 6-pin connectors and a 450 W PSU requirement. The AMD card also provides modern display outputs with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, compared to the NVIDIA card's outdated DVI and mini-HDMI 1.3a ports.

For professionals needing compute performance, modern API support, and efficiency, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is the clear data-driven choice. Its 177% OpenCL win, 8 GB memory, and single-slot design with no power connectors make it suitable for workstations where space and power are constrained. The GTX 460 v2, despite its age, remains relevant in average benchmarks but lacks the features and compute power required for contemporary workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 wins decisively in compute-intensive applications. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 24217 versus 8743 represents a 177% advantage that cannot be overlooked. This makes the AMD card the superior option for GPU-accelerated computing, rendering, and any workload that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan. The Vulkan 1.3 support and DirectX 12 (12_0) compatibility ensure the AMD card handles modern APIs effectively.

The AMD card also wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. With 8 GB versus 1024 MB, the WX 5100 can handle larger datasets and textures without hitting memory limits. The 160.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 96.19 GB/s further cements its advantage in memory-intensive tasks. The 3.892 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 121.6 GTexel/s texture rate dwarf the NVIDIA card's 1,046.3 GFLOPS and 43.62 GTexel/s.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2's wins are more subtle. Its average benchmark score of 8743 comes from a single OpenCL test, meaning it has no recorded wins in the head-to-head data. However, its presence in the nearest rivals list with a 0% delta against the RTX 3050 A Mobile suggests that in certain legacy workloads, the Fermi architecture can still perform adequately. The card's DirectX 12 (11_0) support, while older, provides basic compatibility with modern games.

The GTX 460 v2 may appeal to users seeking a compact dual-slot card with dual DVI outputs for legacy displays. Its 210 mm length and 24 ROPs, while fewer than the AMD card's 32, still deliver a 10.91 GPixel/s pixel rate that suffices for older games. The 40 nm process and 1,950 million transistors, while less efficient than the 14 nm AMD chip, represent a simpler design that may have different compatibility characteristics in older systems with PCIe 2.0 interfaces.

For power-constrained systems, the AMD card's 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it the only viable option between the two. The GTX 460 v2's 160 W TDP and 2x 6-pin requirement demand a more robust PSU and better case airflow. The AMD card's single-slot design also saves valuable space in compact workstations, while the NVIDIA card's dual-slot footprint limits placement options.