AMD Radeon R5 M240 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single head-to-head benchmark comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 and the AMD Radeon R5 M240, using the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this measurement, the GTX 460 records a score of 7925, while the Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975. The GTX 460 wins this comparison outright, with a delta of 13.6% over the Radeon. That is a substantial margin in a compute-oriented workload, indicating a clear performance advantage for the older NVIDIA part.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the GTX 460's score of 7925 places it in the 41st percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro K4100M at 7906 (0.2% behind the GTX 460), the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 at 8039 (1.4% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M at 8040 (1.4% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti at 8053 (1.6% ahead). The GTX 460 sits in a tight cluster: it is essentially neck-and-neck with the Quadro K4100M, and only slightly behind a group of more modern mobile and desktop parts. This suggests that despite its age, the GTX 460 remains competitive in raw OpenCL compute throughput.

For the AMD Radeon R5 M240, the score of 6975 places it in the 39th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M at 6946 (0.4% behind the Radeon), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M at 7023 (0.7% ahead), the NVIDIA T600 at 7035 (0.8% ahead), and the AMD FirePro M5100 at 6830 (2.1% behind). The Radeon R5 M240 also sits in a close grouping, but at a lower absolute level. The gap between the two cards is consistent: the GTX 460 is 13.6% ahead in the direct comparison, and its percentile ranking is two points higher.

The recorded data shows a single clear winner across the entire head-to-head suite: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 takes the win in 1 out of 1 tests, while the AMD Radeon R5 M240 secures no wins. The margin is not marginal; it is a double-digit percentage difference that should translate into observable performance differences in compute-oriented applications.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 and the AMD Radeon R5 M240 come from fundamentally different architectural eras and design philosophies. The GTX 460 uses the GF104 chip, based on the Fermi architecture, and belongs to the GeForce 400 generation. It is fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC, with a transistor count of 1,950 million spread across a die size of 332 mm². The transistor density is 5.9 million per square millimeter. The Radeon R5 M240, in contrast, uses the Jet chip, based on GCN 1.0 architecture, and belongs to the Gem System (R5 M200) generation. It is built on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC, with 690 million transistors on a die size of 56 mm², yielding a much higher transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter.

The memory subsystems differ sharply. The GTX 460 ships with 768 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 86.40 GB/s. The Radeon R5 M240 has 1024 MB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, with a bandwidth of only 14.40 GB/s. That is a six-fold difference in memory bandwidth, which heavily favors the GTX 460 in bandwidth-sensitive workloads. The Radeon's memory clock is listed at 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective, while the GTX 460's memory runs at 900 MHz with 3.6 Gbps effective. The Radeon does have a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1030 MHz, while the GTX 460's base and boost clocks are not recorded in the database.

In terms of compute resources, the GTX 460 has 336 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units. The Radeon R5 M240 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The pixel rate for the GTX 460 is 9.450 GPixel/s, compared to 8.240 GPixel/s for the Radeon. The texture rate is 37.80 GTexel/s for the GTX 460 versus 20.60 GTexel/s for the Radeon. The FP32 performance is 907.2 GFLOPS for the GTX 460 and 659.2 GFLOPS for the Radeon, a 37.6% advantage for the NVIDIA part. Neither card has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores.

The bus interface differs: the GTX 460 uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the Radeon R5 M240 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The GTX 460 has a TDP of 160 W, requires a dual-slot cooler, uses 2x 6-pin power connectors, and suggests a 450 W power supply. The Radeon has no recorded TDP, slot width, power connector, or suggested PSU data, indicating it is likely a low-power mobile or OEM part. The GTX 460 has display outputs of 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a, while the Radeon has no recorded display outputs. In API support, the GTX 460 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no recorded Vulkan support. The Radeon supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

The GTX 460 is a full-length card at 210 mm (8.3 inches), while the Radeon has no recorded dimensions. The GTX 460 was released on July 11, 2010, with a predecessor of GeForce 200 and a successor of GeForce 500. The Radeon was released on September 17, 2014, with a predecessor of Solar System and a successor of Polaris Mobile. Both are marked as end-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 records a Geekbench OpenCL score of 7925, while the AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975. The GTX 460 is 13.6% ahead in this test.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare between the two cards?

A: The GTX 460 has a memory bandwidth of 86.40 GB/s using GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus. The Radeon R5 M240 has 14.40 GB/s using DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. The GTX 460 has a substantial bandwidth advantage.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The GTX 460 has 336 shading units, while the Radeon R5 M240 has 320 shading units. The NVIDIA part has 16 more shading units.

Q: What are the transistor counts and die sizes?

A: The GTX 460 has 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die. The Radeon R5 M240 has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die.

Q: Which card supports Vulkan?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240 supports Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 has no recorded Vulkan support in the database.

Q: What are the release dates for these GPUs?

A: The GTX 460 was released on July 11, 2010. The Radeon R5 M240 was released on September 17, 2014.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner in raw compute performance: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460. Its OpenCL score of 7925 beats the Radeon R5 M240's 6975 by 13.6%. The GTX 460 also holds advantages in memory bandwidth (86.40 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s), texture fill rate (37.80 GTexel/s versus 20.60 GTexel/s), pixel rate (9.450 GPixel/s versus 8.240 GPixel/s), and FP32 throughput (907.2 GFLOPS versus 659.2 GFLOPS). Every recorded performance metric favors the NVIDIA part.

The Radeon R5 M240 does have some modern features that the GTX 460 lacks. It supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GTX 460 has no recorded Vulkan support. It also has a higher DirectX version (12 (11_1) versus 12 (11_0)), a smaller process node (28 nm versus 40 nm), and a higher transistor density (12.3M per mm² versus 5.9M per mm²). The Radeon also has a larger memory capacity at 1024 MB versus 768 MB, and it uses a more power-efficient design with no recorded TDP or power connector requirements, compared to the GTX 460's 160 W TDP and 2x 6-pin connectors.

However, for users prioritizing benchmark performance, the GTX 460 is the superior choice. Its percentile ranking of 41 versus the Radeon's 39, combined with the double-digit delta in the head-to-head test, indicates that the NVIDIA part delivers more compute throughput. The Radeon's advantages are primarily in API compatibility and power efficiency, not in raw speed.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 and the AMD Radeon R5 M240:

• Chip: GF104 (NVIDIA) versus Jet (AMD)
• Architecture: Fermi (NVIDIA) versus GCN 1.0 (AMD)
• Generation: GeForce 400 (NVIDIA) versus Gem System (R5 M200) (AMD)
• Process Node: 40 nm (NVIDIA) versus 28 nm (AMD)
• Transistors: 1,950 million (NVIDIA) versus 690 million (AMD)
• Die Size: 332 mm² (NVIDIA) versus 56 mm² (AMD)
• Transistor Density: 5.9M / mm² (NVIDIA) versus 12.3M / mm² (AMD)
• Base Clock: Not recorded (NVIDIA) versus 1000 MHz (AMD)
• Boost Clock: Not recorded (NVIDIA) versus 1030 MHz (AMD)
• Memory Clock: 900 MHz, 3.6 Gbps effective (NVIDIA) versus 900 MHz, 1800 Mbps effective (AMD)
• Memory Size: 768 MB (NVIDIA) versus 1024 MB (AMD)
• Memory Type: GDDR5 (NVIDIA) versus DDR3 (AMD)
• Memory Bus Width: 192 bit (NVIDIA) versus 64 bit (AMD)
• Memory Bandwidth: 86.40 GB/s (NVIDIA) versus 14.40 GB/s (AMD)
• Shading Units: 336 (NVIDIA) versus 320 (AMD)
• TMUs: 56 (NVIDIA) versus 20 (AMD)
• ROPs: 24 (NVIDIA) versus 8 (AMD)
• Pixel Rate: 9.450 GPixel/s (NVIDIA) versus 8.240 GPixel/s (AMD)
• Texture Rate: 37.80 GTexel/s (NVIDIA) versus 20.60 GTexel/s (AMD)
• FP32: 907.2 GFLOPS (NVIDIA) versus 659.2 GFLOPS (AMD)
• TDP: 160 W (NVIDIA) versus not recorded (AMD)
• Slot Width: Dual-slot (NVIDIA) versus not recorded (AMD)
• Power Connectors: 2x 6-pin (NVIDIA) versus not recorded (AMD)
• Suggested PSU: 450 W (NVIDIA) versus not recorded (AMD)
• Bus Interface: PCIe 2.0 x16 (NVIDIA) versus PCIe 3.0 x8 (AMD)
• Display Outputs: 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a (NVIDIA) versus not recorded (AMD)
• DirectX: 12 (11_0) (NVIDIA) versus 12 (11_1) (AMD)
• Vulkan: Not recorded (NVIDIA) versus 1.2.170 (AMD)
• Dimensions: 210 mm, 8.3 inches length (NVIDIA) versus not recorded (AMD)
• Release Date: 2010-07-11 (NVIDIA) versus 2014-09-17 (AMD)
• Predecessor: GeForce 200 (NVIDIA) versus Solar System (AMD)
• Successor: GeForce 500 (NVIDIA) versus Polaris Mobile (AMD)
• Launch MSRP: 199 USD (NVIDIA) versus not recorded (AMD)

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 wins in every recorded benchmark category. In the head-to-head OpenCL test, it beats the Radeon R5 M240 by 13.6%. It has higher memory bandwidth by a factor of six, higher texture fill rate by 83.5%, higher pixel rate by 14.7%, and higher FP32 compute by 37.6%. The GTX 460 is the clear choice for compute-intensive workloads, such as OpenCL-accelerated applications, where its larger memory bus and higher shader throughput provide a decisive edge.

The AMD Radeon R5 M240 wins in areas not covered by direct performance benchmarks. It has a larger memory capacity of 1024 MB versus 768 MB, which could be beneficial for applications that require more frame buffer space. It supports Vulkan 1.2.170, enabling use in modern graphics APIs that the GTX 460 cannot access. It has a more modern feature set with DirectX 12 (11_1) support. The Radeon also has a smaller process node at 28 nm versus 40 nm, leading to a much higher transistor density, and it lacks any recorded power connector or TDP requirements, suggesting it is designed for lower-power environments such as laptops or OEM systems. The Radeon also has a boost clock of 1030 MHz, while the GTX 460 has no recorded boost clock.

For users who prioritize raw compute performance in existing applications, the GTX 460 is the only logical choice based on the data. For users who need modern API support, particularly Vulkan, or who require a low-power, compact solution with more memory capacity, the Radeon R5 M240 has specific advantages that the benchmark scores do not capture. The GTX 460's launch MSRP was 199 USD, though no pricing data exists for the Radeon. The production status for both is end-of-life, meaning neither is a current product, but the recorded data clearly shows the GTX 460 as the stronger performer in the measured workload.