AMD Radeon R7 M460 vs NVIDIA Quadro P5000 Comparison

NVIDIA Quadro P5000 vs AMD Radeon R7 M460

The NVIDIA Quadro P5000 and AMD Radeon R7 M460 represent two entirely different tiers of graphics hardware, separated by architecture, memory capacity, and raw compute output. The database shows the Quadro P5000 winning the sole head-to-head benchmark by a margin of 694.1%, a gap that underscores fundamental design goals: one is a professional workstation card built for heavy compute and large datasets, the other is a low-power mobile chip meant for basic laptop graphics. The data is unambiguous in performance, but the choice between them depends entirely on workload context, as the M460 still holds a place for systems where power and size constraints dominate.

The Verdict

From the recorded benchmarks, the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 is the clear performance leader. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the P5000 scores 52,509 points versus the R7 M460's 6,612, a delta of 694.1%. This is not a close contest; the P5000 delivers nearly eight times the compute throughput in this measurement. The P5000 also sits at the 41st percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the R7 M460 sits at the 38th percentile, a modest gap in relative standing but a massive one in absolute scores. The P5000's average benchmark score of 8,039 across its ten tests further confirms its breadth, while the M460's average is simply its single OpenCL score of 6,612.

Who should pick which? The Quadro P5000 is for anyone running GPU-accelerated workloads that demand high FP32 throughput, large frame buffers, or professional display features. Its 16 GB of GDDR5X memory and 288.5 GB/s bandwidth are suited for rendering, simulation, or machine learning inference tasks. The R7 M460, with its 2 GB GDDR5 and 36.00 GB/s bandwidth, is for basic laptop use: video playback, light 2D applications, or legacy DirectX 9 titles. The data does not support choosing the M460 for any compute-heavy role; it only makes sense where the P5000's dual-slot, 180 W design is physically impossible to accommodate.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural eras and process nodes. The Quadro P5000 uses NVIDIA's Pascal architecture on a 16 nm TSMC process, packing 7,200 million transistors onto a 314 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 22.9 million per mm². The R7 M460 uses AMD's GCN 3.0 architecture on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, giving a density of 12.4 million per mm². The P5000's newer node and larger die allow for significantly more compute resources.

The P5000 features 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The M460 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This is a 6.7x difference in shading units, a 6.7x difference in TMUs, and an 8x difference in ROPs, all favoring the P5000. Clock speeds also differ: the P5000 runs at a base of 1607 MHz and boosts to 1733 MHz, while the M460 runs at 730 MHz base and 1024 MHz boost. The P5000's higher clocks compound its architectural advantage.

Memory subsystems are radically different. The P5000 uses 16 GB of GDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, achieving 288.5 GB/s bandwidth. The M460 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, achieving only 36.00 GB/s. The P5000's memory clock is 1127 MHz with 9 Gbps effective data rate, versus the M460's 1125 MHz with 4.5 Gbps effective. The P5000 also supports PCIe 3.0 x16, while the M460 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x8, halving the available host interface bandwidth.

Feature-wise, the P5000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the M460 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The P5000's DirectX 12_1 feature level includes additional rendering features absent from the M460's 12_0. The P5000 also has display outputs (1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a), while the M460 has no listed display outputs, indicating it is a mobile-only chip.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 in the only shared benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the P5000 scores 52,509 versus the R7 M460's 6,612, a 694.1% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R7 M460 have any benchmark where it beats the Quadro P5000?

A: No. The database records only one head-to-head benchmark, and the P5000 wins it. The M460 has no wins in any recorded test.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The P5000 has 16 GB of GDDR5X, while the M460 has 2 GB of GDDR5, an 8x difference in capacity.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The P5000 has a density of 22.9 million transistors per mm², versus the M460's 12.4 million per mm².

Q: Are both GPUs end-of-life?

A: Yes, both are listed as end-of-life in the database. The P5000 was released on 2016-09-30, and the M460 on 2016-05-14.

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference?

A: The P5000 delivers 8.873 TFLOPS of FP32, while the M460 delivers 786.4 GFLOPS, a difference of roughly 11.3x.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs, based on the database records:

• Process node: 16 nm (P5000) vs 28 nm (M460)
• Transistors: 7,200 million vs 1,550 million
• Die size: 314 mm² vs 125 mm²
• Transistor density: 22.9M / mm² vs 12.4M / mm²
• Base clock: 1607 MHz vs 730 MHz
• Boost clock: 1733 MHz vs 1024 MHz
• Memory clock: 1127 MHz / 9 Gbps effective vs 1125 MHz / 4.5 Gbps effective
• Memory size: 16 GB vs 2 GB
• Memory type: GDDR5X vs GDDR5
• Memory bus width: 256 bit vs 64 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 288.5 GB/s vs 36.00 GB/s
• Shading units: 2560 vs 384
• TMUs: 160 vs 24
• ROPs: 64 vs 8
• Pixel rate: 110.9 GPixel/s vs 8.192 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 277.3 GTexel/s vs 24.58 GTexel/s
• FP32: 8.873 TFLOPS vs 786.4 GFLOPS
• FP16: 138.6 GFLOPS (1:64) vs 786.4 GFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 180 W vs not listed
• Slot width: Dual-slot vs not listed
• Power connectors: 1x 8-pin vs not listed
• Suggested PSU: 450 W vs not listed
• Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 vs PCIe 3.0 x8
• Display outputs: 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.4a vs not listed
• DirectX support: 12 (12_1) vs 12 (12_0)
• Vulkan support: 1.4 vs 1.2.170
• Dimensions: 267 mm length, 111 mm height vs not listed
• Release date: 2016-09-30 vs 2016-05-14
• Predecessor: Quadro Maxwell vs Solar System
• Successor: Quadro Volta vs Polaris Mobile
• Launch MSRP: 2,499 USD vs not listed

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains exactly one shared benchmark between the two: Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA Quadro P5000 scores 52,509 points, while the AMD Radeon R7 M460 scores 6,612 points. The delta is 694.1%, meaning the P5000 is roughly 7.94 times faster in this compute test. This is the largest single discrepancy in the entire comparison, and it reflects the fundamental gap in shading units, memory bandwidth, and clock speeds.

For context, the P5000's nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M (average score 8,040, delta 0%), the GeForce GTX 650 Ti (8,053, delta -0.2%), the GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost (8,067, delta -0.3%), and the NVIDIA GRID K2 (8,080, delta -0.5%). These rivals all cluster around the 8,000-point mark, which means the P5000's average benchmark score of 8,039 is essentially tied with them. However, in the OpenCL test specifically, the P5000's 52,509 is far above this cluster, indicating that its compute performance is disproportionately strong relative to its overall average.

The M460's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon HD 7730M (6,581, delta 0.5%), the Intel UHD Graphics P750 (6,554, delta 0.9%), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 (6,698, delta -1.3%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M (6,513, delta 1.5%). These rivals all sit within 1.5% of the M460's 6,612 score, showing that the M460 is squarely in the entry-level mobile segment. The P5000's OpenCL score is over 8x higher than the M460's closest rival, reinforcing the chasm between these two product classes.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro P5000 wins in every measured category. It has higher raw compute (8.873 TFLOPS FP32 vs 786.4 GFLOPS), higher pixel rate (110.9 GPixel/s vs 8.192 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (277.3 GTexel/s vs 24.58 GTexel/s), and 8x the memory capacity. Its 288.5 GB/s bandwidth is 8x the M460's 36.00 GB/s. The P5000 also supports more display outputs, a higher DirectX feature level (12_1 vs 12_0), and a newer Vulkan version (1.4 vs 1.2.170). For any workload that stresses compute, memory, or rendering throughput, the P5000 is the definitive choice.

The AMD Radeon R7 M460 wins in exactly one measurable way: FP16 compute. The M460 delivers 786.4 GFLOPS of FP16, matching its FP32 rate at a 1:1 ratio. The P5000 delivers only 138.6 GFLOPS of FP16, a 1:64 ratio, meaning it is far slower at half-precision math. This makes the M460 technically better suited for FP16-heavy workloads, though its absolute FP32 performance is so low that this advantage is largely theoretical. The M460 also has no listed TDP, slot width, or power connectors, but its 28 nm process and lower clocks suggest it is designed for low-power environments, though the database does not specify exact wattage.

In practical terms, the P5000 is for professional workstations: CAD, scientific compute, video editing, or any task that requires large amounts of VRAM and sustained compute throughput. The M460 is for basic mobile graphics, where the lack of a TDP rating and absence of a power connector indicate it is integrated into laptops with thermal and power budgets far below the P5000's 180 W envelope. The data does not support any scenario where the M460 outperforms the P5000 in general-purpose compute; its only edge is the FP16 ratio, which is irrelevant for most real-world applications given its low absolute throughput.