AMD Radeon R5 M240 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE Comparison

The AMD Radeon R5 M240 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE are both end-of-life graphics cards from different eras, with the data showing a clear but narrow overall winner. In the single Geekbench OpenCL benchmark available, the R5 M240 scores 6975, which is 9.2% higher than the GTX 460 SE's score of 6389. This places the AMD part in the 39th percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA card sits slightly lower at the 37th percentile. The following analysis breaks down where each card holds an advantage, how they compare in specific workloads, and what the underlying specifications and architectures mean for real-world usage.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data indicates that the AMD Radeon R5 M240 wins the only head-to-head test available, the Geekbench OpenCL compute benchmark. This is a significant result because it shows that despite being a mobile-oriented chip with a narrower memory bus, the R5 M240 outperforms the older desktop GTX 460 SE in raw compute throughput. The R5 M240's score of 6975 puts it 9.2% ahead of the GTX 460 SE's 6389, meaning that for general-purpose GPU compute tasks, OpenCL workloads, or any application that leverages shader-based processing, the AMD card has a measurable edge.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE does not win any benchmark in this dataset. However, its position in the nearestRivals list suggests it trades blows with other cards in its performance class. The GTX 460 SE's score of 6389 is exactly equal to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M, indicating that in pure compute, these two are performance equals. It is also only 0.9% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 and 1% behind the AMD Radeon R7 M350, showing that the GTX 460 SE is competitive with a range of cards from both vendors. The R5 M240, by comparison, sits 0.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M and 0.7% behind the GTX 680M, making it a slightly stronger performer in this specific test.

In terms of use cases, the R5 M240 is the better choice for compute-oriented tasks like OpenCL acceleration, where its higher shading unit count (320 vs. 288) and newer architecture help it pull ahead. The GTX 460 SE does not have a benchmark win to claim, but its higher texture and pixel rates suggest it may be better suited for tasks that rely heavily on texture filtering or rasterization, even if that advantage does not show up in the available compute benchmark.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240 is faster, scoring 6975 compared to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE's 6389. This gives the AMD card a 9.2% advantage in this specific test.

Q: How does the R5 M240 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The R5 M240 scores 0.4% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M, 2.1% higher than the AMD FirePro M5100, and is only 0.7% behind the GTX 680M and 0.8% behind the NVIDIA T600.

Q: What is the performance position of the GTX 460 SE relative to other cards?

A: The GTX 460 SE's score of 6389 is exactly tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M. It is 0.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M350.

Q: Does the GTX 460 SE have any advantages in the head-to-head data?

A: No. The head-to-head benchmark shows the R5 M240 winning the only test, with the GTX 460 SE recording zero wins in this comparison.

Q: Which card has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE has a much higher memory bandwidth of 108.8 GB/s, compared to the R5 M240's 14.40 GB/s. This is due to its 256-bit bus and GDDR5 memory, versus the R5 M240's 64-bit bus and DDR3 memory.

Q: Are both cards from the same manufacturing process?

A: No. The AMD R5 M240 is built on a 28 nm process, while the NVIDIA GTX 460 SE uses a 40 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the AMD Radeon R5 M240 achieves a score of 6975 against the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE's 6389. This 9.2% difference is the sole data point for judging performance, and it clearly favors the AMD card. In percentile terms, the R5 M240 ranks in the 39th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 460 SE ranks in the 37th percentile, reinforcing the idea that the R5 M240 is the stronger of the two in this workload.

The nearestRivals data provides additional context. The R5 M240's score of 6975 places it just 0.4% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M (6946) and 2.1% above the AMD FirePro M5100 (6830). It trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M (7023) by 0.7% and the NVIDIA T600 (7035) by 0.8%. This shows that the R5 M240 competes well against a range of mid-range cards from both vendors, with its performance being very close to that of the GTX 680M, a card typically considered a strong mobile performer.

On the other side, the GTX 460 SE's score of 6389 is identical to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M, meaning the two are exact equals in this benchmark. It is also 0.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 (6330) and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M350 (6327). The GTX 460 SE is also only 0.3% behind the NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 72 GB Blackwell (6407), a card from a much newer generation, which highlights that the GTX 460 SE's compute performance is still respectable even by modern standards, though it lacks modern features.

The single benchmark result is decisive for compute workloads, but it does not capture the full picture for gaming or graphics rendering. The R5 M240's higher score suggests better raw compute, but the GTX 460 SE's superior texture rate (31.20 GTexel/s vs. 20.60 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (7.800 GPixel/s vs. 8.240 GPixel/s, actually slightly lower) indicate that the NVIDIA card may be faster in fill-rate-limited scenarios. However, since there are no gaming benchmarks in the data, the compute win is the only measurable conclusion.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ significantly in almost every major specification. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 uses a 28 nm process, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE uses a 40 nm process, both from TSMC. The R5 M240 has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.3 million per mm². The GTX 460 SE has 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, giving it a density of 5.9 million per mm². This means the R5 M240 packs more than twice the transistor density, a direct result of its smaller manufacturing node.

Memory is another major divergence. The R5 M240 comes with 1024 MB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 460 SE also has 1024 MB of memory, but it is GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing 108.8 GB/s of bandwidth — over 7.5 times more bandwidth than the AMD card. This is a critical difference for high-resolution textures and memory-intensive workloads, where the GTX 460 SE has a clear theoretical advantage.

The compute units also differ. The R5 M240 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 raster output units (ROPs). The GTX 460 SE has 288 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The AMD card has more shading units, but the NVIDIA card has more than double the TMUs and four times the ROPs, which explains its higher texture rate (31.20 GTexel/s vs. 20.60 GTexel/s) and comparable pixel rate (7.800 GPixel/s vs. 8.240 GPixel/s).

Clock speeds and power characteristics also differ. The R5 M240 has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1030 MHz, with memory running at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective). The GTX 460 SE has no listed base or boost clock, but its memory runs at 850 MHz (3.4 Gbps effective). The R5 M240 has no listed TDP, while the GTX 460 SE is rated at 150 W and requires a 450 W power supply, along with dual 6-pin power connectors. The GTX 460 SE is also a dual-slot card measuring 210 mm (8.3 inches) in length, whereas the R5 M240 has no listed dimensions or power requirements.

Interface and connectivity also differ. The R5 M240 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the GTX 460 SE uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The GTX 460 SE has display outputs of 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a, while the R5 M240 has no listed display outputs. The R5 M240 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GTX 460 SE supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is stark. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 is based on the GCN 1.0 architecture, using the Jet chip, and is part of the Gem System (R5 M200) generation. This is a modern, unified shader architecture designed for compute efficiency, which is why it excels in the OpenCL benchmark. The GTX 460 SE, in contrast, uses the Fermi architecture with the GF104 chip, part of the GeForce 400 generation. Fermi was NVIDIA's first fully unified architecture, but it is older and less efficient than GCN 1.0 in compute workloads.

The process node difference is a key factor. The R5 M240's 28 nm process allows for much higher transistor density (12.3M / mm²) compared to the GTX 460 SE's 40 nm process (5.9M / mm²). This means the R5 M240 achieves its performance with far fewer transistors (690 million vs. 1,950 million) and a much smaller die (56 mm² vs. 332 mm²). The newer process also likely contributes to the R5 M240's lack of a listed TDP, suggesting it is a low-power part, whereas the GTX 460 SE is a power-hungry 150 W card.

The R5 M240's GCN architecture also includes support for newer APIs like Vulkan 1.2.170, which the GTX 460 SE does not list. Both cards support DirectX 12, but the R5 M240 supports the 11_1 feature level while the GTX 460 SE supports the 11_0 level. The R5 M240's higher shading unit count (320 vs. 288) and higher clock speeds (1000 MHz base) contribute to its FP32 performance of 659.2 GFLOPS, while the GTX 460 SE's lower clock and fewer shading units yield 748.8 GFLOPS — actually higher, thanks to a different execution layout.

The GTX 460 SE's Fermi architecture, despite being older, offers a much wider memory bus (256-bit vs. 64-bit) and more memory bandwidth (108.8 GB/s vs. 14.40 GB/s), which is a significant architectural advantage for data-heavy tasks. The R5 M240 compensates with more shading units and a newer process, but its narrow memory interface is a clear bottleneck. The GTX 460 SE also has more TMUs (48 vs. 20) and ROPs (32 vs. 8), giving it an advantage in texture-heavy and rasterization workloads, even though its compute performance is lower.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD Radeon R5 M240 is the winner in raw compute performance, scoring 9.2% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE in the Geekbench OpenCL test. Its newer 28 nm process, GCN 1.0 architecture, and higher shading unit count give it an edge in compute-bound tasks. If your priority is OpenCL performance or any workload that leverages shader throughput, the R5 M240 is the clear choice, as it also ranks higher in the overall percentile (39th vs. 37th).

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE is not without merit, but its advantage lies in specifications that do not show up in the compute benchmark. With 7.5 times more memory bandwidth (108.8 GB/s vs. 14.40 GB/s), double the TMUs, and four times the ROPs, the GTX 460 SE is likely the better pick for traditional graphics rendering, high-resolution texture work, or any task that is memory-bandwidth-limited. Its 150 W TDP and dual-slot design indicate it is a desktop card meant for a full-power environment, while the R5 M240's lack of a TDP suggests a low-power mobile or embedded solution.

For a builder choosing between the two, the decision hinges on the workload. The R5 M240 wins the only benchmark provided, making it the safer bet for compute. However, the GTX 460 SE's superior memory subsystem and fill rates are tangible advantages for gaming at higher resolutions or with anti-aliasing enabled, even if no gaming benchmarks are present in the data. The GTX 460 SE also has a listed launch MSRP of 160 USD, which is a historical data point but not relevant to current purchasing decisions. Ultimately, the R5 M240 is the better compute card, while the GTX 460 SE may be the better graphics card — the data supports the former, and the specifications support the latter.