AMD Radeon R7 240 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 240 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M represent two distinct eras of mobile and low-profile graphics. The data in the database shows a clear winner in raw compute performance, but the architectural differences tell a more nuanced story than a single benchmark score suggests. This analysis compares the recorded specifications and benchmark results to determine where each GPU excels and which type of user should consider each part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct benchmark comparison between these two GPUs, and the result is decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R7 240 scores 5063 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M scores 4282 points. This represents an 18.2% advantage for the AMD part, a substantial margin in compute workloads.

Looking at the percentile rankings, the R7 240 sits at the 30th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the GTX 460M ranks at the 25th percentile. This five-percentile gap confirms that the AMD card is not just slightly faster, but meaningfully better positioned within the overall performance hierarchy.

The nearest rivals for the R7 240 include the AMD Radeon R7 M340 with an identical score of 5063, the AMD FirePro W4170M at 5034 (0.6% slower), and the AMD Radeon R5 M430 at 5018 (0.9% slower). The GTX 460M's closest competitors include the AMD FirePro W2100 at 4295 (0.3% faster), the AMD Radeon Vega 3 at 4268 (0.3% slower), and the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M at 4241 (1% slower). Interestingly, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 appears in the GTX 460M's rival list with a score of 4335, which is 1.2% faster, showing how much modern GPUs have eclipsed this older mobile part.

The 18.2% lead in OpenCL compute is consistent with the other recorded metrics. The AMD card produces 499.2 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, compared to 518.4 GFLOPS for the NVIDIA part. This is a curious inversion: the GTX 460M has a higher theoretical peak, yet it loses by a wide margin in the actual benchmark. This discrepancy suggests that the R7 240's architecture is more efficient at translating raw FLOPs into real-world compute results, or that the benchmark favors the newer GCN architecture's scheduling capabilities.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing generations. The AMD Radeon R7 240 uses the Oland chip based on the GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M uses the GF106 chip based on the Fermi architecture, fabricated on an older 40 nm process, also at TSMC.

The process node difference is significant: 28 nm versus 40 nm. This allows the AMD chip to pack 950 million transistors into a die size of just 77 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip has more transistors overall at 1,170 million, but its die is much larger at 238 mm², yielding a density of only 4.9 million per square millimeter. The AMD design is more than twice as dense, which explains how it achieves similar or better performance with a much smaller physical footprint.

Memory architecture also differs markedly. The R7 240 uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 460M uses 1536 MB of GDDR5 memory on a wider 192-bit bus, delivering 60.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has more than double the memory bandwidth, which should theoretically help in bandwidth-sensitive workloads. However, the benchmark results show this advantage did not translate into a compute win.

The shading unit counts are revealing. The AMD card has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 render output units (ROPs). The NVIDIA card has 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The AMD card has 67% more shading units, while the NVIDIA card has 60% more TMUs and three times the ROP count. This creates a fascinating split: AMD's strength lies in parallel compute through its high shader count, while NVIDIA's strength lies in texture processing and pixel throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 240 wins in raw OpenCL compute performance, as evidenced by its 18.2% benchmark lead. This makes it the stronger choice for general-purpose GPU compute tasks, OpenCL acceleration, and any workload that leverages the GCN architecture's compute-focused design. Its higher shader count and newer architecture give it an edge in parallel processing scenarios.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M wins in memory bandwidth and pixel processing throughput. Its 60.00 GB/s bandwidth is more than double the R7 240's 28.80 GB/s, and its 24 ROPs triple the AMD card's 8 ROPs. These specifications suggest the GTX 460M would perform better in fill-rate-limited scenarios, such as high-resolution texture rendering or anti-aliasing operations. Its 21.60 GTexel/s texture rate also exceeds the R7 240's 15.60 GTexel/s.

The R7 240 offers a higher pixel rate at 6.240 GPixel/s versus 5.400 GPixel/s for the GTX 460M, which is surprising given the NVIDIA card's ROP advantage. This indicates that the AMD architecture achieves better per-ROP efficiency, likely due to its newer design.

For typical use cases, the R7 240 is better suited for users who need a low-power desktop GPU for compute tasks, legacy gaming at modest settings, or multimedia workloads. The GTX 460M, being an MXM module for laptops, is better suited for mobile users who need a dedicated GPU with higher memory bandwidth, though its 50 W TDP versus the R7 240's 30 W TDP makes it a more power-hungry option.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification category. The R7 240 is a desktop card with a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the GTX 460M is an MXM module for portable devices with a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface. The R7 240 has a 168 mm length and 69 mm height, while the GTX 460M has no recorded dimensions due to its mobile nature.

The R7 240 operates at a base clock of 730 MHz with a boost clock of 780 MHz, while the GTX 460M has no recorded base or boost clocks. Memory speeds also differ: the R7 240 runs at 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective, while the GTX 460M runs at 625 MHz with 2.5 Gbps effective.

Power requirements favor the AMD card. The R7 240 has a TDP of 30 W and a suggested PSU of 200 W, while the GTX 460M has a TDP of 50 W and no suggested PSU recorded. Both cards use no external power connectors, but the R7 240 is a single-slot design while the GTX 460M is an MXM module.

API support shows another generational gap. Both support DirectX 12, but the R7 240 implements version 11_1 while the GTX 460M implements 11_0. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The R7 240 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GTX 460M has no recorded Vulkan support.

The R7 240 was released on October 7, 2013, while the GTX 460M was released on September 2, 2010, a three-year gap that explains the architectural differences. The R7 240 has a launch MSRP of 69 USD, while the GTX 460M has no recorded MSRP. Both are end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 240 scores 5063 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 18.2% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M's score of 4282.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The GTX 460M has 60.00 GB/s of memory bandwidth from its 192-bit GDDR5 bus, while the R7 240 has 28.80 GB/s from its 128-bit DDR3 bus, making the NVIDIA card more than twice as fast in this metric.

Q: What are their power consumption figures?

A: The R7 240 has a TDP of 30 W, while the GTX 460M has a TDP of 50 W. The R7 240 is the more power-efficient option.

Q: Which GPU supports newer API features?

A: The R7 240 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 460M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no recorded Vulkan support.

Q: How do their transistor densities compare?

A: The R7 240 packs 950 million transistors into 77 mm² for a density of 12.3M per mm², while the GTX 460M packs 1,170 million transistors into 238 mm² for a density of 4.9M per mm².

Q: What is the R7 240's launch price?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 240 had a launch MSRP of 69 USD. The GTX 460M has no recorded launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD Radeon R7 240 for compute-oriented tasks. Its 18.2% lead in OpenCL benchmarks, higher percentile ranking (30th versus 25th), and superior transistor density on a newer 28 nm process make it the more capable modern part. Users who need a low-power desktop GPU for OpenCL acceleration, legacy gaming, or general multimedia workloads should choose the R7 240.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M retains advantages in specific areas. Its 60.00 GB/s memory bandwidth and 24 ROPs suggest it would handle bandwidth-hungry and pixel-heavy workloads better, despite losing the compute benchmark. Mobile users with an MXM-compatible laptop who prioritize memory throughput over raw compute might still consider this part, though its 50 W TDP and older Fermi architecture place it at a disadvantage.

For most buyers, the R7 240 is the safer choice. It offers better compute performance, lower power draw, a smaller physical footprint, and support for modern APIs like Vulkan. The GTX 460M's only clear wins are in memory bandwidth and ROP count, which did not translate to benchmark success. The database records one benchmark, and the R7 240 won it by a decisive margin. That is the most direct evidence available, and it points firmly toward AMD.