AMD Radeon R9 M265X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R9 M265X and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 are two end-of-life graphics cards from different eras and market segments, yet their benchmark scores place them in remarkably close competition. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark—Geekbench OpenCL—where the AMD card edges out the NVIDIA card by a margin of 1.2%, scoring 8851 versus 8743. This narrow gap is validated by the percentile rankings, as both cards sit at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, indicating they deliver nearly identical raw compute performance in this specific workload, despite their vastly different architectures and specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are strikingly tight. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X scores 8851, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 scores 8743, giving AMD a 1.2% advantage. This is a razor-thin margin that falls well within typical run-to-run variance for OpenCL workloads, meaning the two cards are effectively tied in this metric. The deltaPct values in their respective nearestRivals lists reinforce this: from the AMD card's perspective, the GTX 460 v2 is 1.2% slower, while from the NVIDIA card's perspective, the R9 M265X is 1.2% faster.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, both cards are surrounded by similar performers. The R9 M265X's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100, which scores 8863 (just 0.1% higher), and the AMD Radeon 550X at 8918 (0.8% higher). On the other side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 8746, which is 1.2% lower than the R9 M265X. The GTX 460 v2's nearest rival is the RTX 3050 A Mobile at 8746 (0% difference), and the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 at 8686 (0.7% lower). This clustering suggests that both cards occupy a specific performance tier where the differences between models are negligible in practice.

The data indicates that in the only measured benchmark, the AMD card wins, but the victory is far from decisive. The 1.2% delta translates to just 108 points, which is not a meaningful performance gap for real-world applications. The fact that both cards share the same 44th percentile ranking among all GPUs is perhaps the most telling statistic—it positions them as equivalent performers in the grand scheme of graphics hardware, regardless of their internal differences.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data, the AMD Radeon R9 M265X wins the single available test, giving it a 1-0 advantage in head-to-head wins. However, this sole victory does not tell the full story of where each card might excel in different scenarios. The AMD card's higher OpenCL score suggests it may have an edge in compute-heavy tasks that leverage OpenCL, such as certain scientific simulations, video encoding, or GPU-accelerated rendering. Its GCN 1.0 architecture, while older, was designed with compute performance in mind, and the 1.2% lead in the benchmark reflects this focus.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, despite losing the OpenCL test, has specifications that could make it more competitive in other workloads not covered by the data. Its significantly higher texture rate of 43.62 GTexel/s—compared to the AMD card's 25.00 GTexel/s—suggests it could outperform in texture-heavy gaming scenarios or applications that rely heavily on texture filtering. Similarly, its pixel rate of 10.91 GPixel/s is slightly higher than the AMD card's 10.00 GPixel/s, which could translate to better fill-rate performance in certain rendering situations.

The memory bandwidth difference is another area where the NVIDIA card shows theoretical advantages. With 96.19 GB/s of bandwidth versus the AMD card's 64.00 GB/s, the GTX 460 v2 has 50% more bandwidth, which could be crucial in high-resolution textures or data-intensive workloads. However, the AMD card has twice the memory capacity (2 GB versus 1024 MB), which could help in scenarios where larger textures or datasets exceed the NVIDIA card's memory limit. The data does not provide benchmarks for these specific scenarios, so these remain speculative advantages based on architectural differences rather than measured results.

Architecture Differences

The two cards could not be more different under the hood. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X is built on TSMC's 28 nm process node, featuring the Venus chip with GCN 1.0 architecture. It packs 1,500 million transistors into a die size of 123 mm², yielding a transistor density of 12.2M per mm². This is a mobile-oriented design, released on 2014-03-20 as part of the Gem System (R9 M200) generation. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, by contrast, uses the older 40 nm process node with the GF114 chip based on Fermi 2.0 architecture. It contains 1,950 million transistors on a much larger 332 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 5.9M per mm². This desktop card was released on 2011-09-23 as part of the GeForce 400 generation.

The compute resources are allocated very differently. The AMD card has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster output units (ROPs). The NVIDIA card has only 336 shading units but 56 TMUs and 24 ROPs. This explains the performance characteristics: the AMD card relies on more shader cores for parallel compute, while the NVIDIA card has more texture and pixel processing hardware. The FP32 performance reflects this, with the GTX 460 v2 achieving 1,046.3 GFLOPS versus the R9 M265X's 800.0 GFLOPS, giving NVIDIA a 31% advantage in raw floating-point throughput.

Memory configurations also differ substantially. The AMD card uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 96.19 GB/s. Clock speeds are similar for memory (1000 MHz vs 1002 MHz effective), but the AMD card has a base clock of 575 MHz with a boost to 625 MHz, while the NVIDIA card's core clocks are not specified in the data. The API support shows the AMD card supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but has no Vulkan support listed.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M265X scores 8851, which is 1.2% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2's 8743.

Q: Do both cards have the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both cards sit at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, indicating they are statistically equivalent in overall performance ranking.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The NVIDIA card has 96.19 GB/s bandwidth, while the AMD card has 64.00 GB/s, giving NVIDIA a 50% advantage in raw bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M265X has 640 shading units, compared to 336 on the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, which is nearly double.

Q: What process nodes are used for each card?

A: The AMD card uses a 28 nm process, while the NVIDIA card uses a larger 40 nm process, both manufactured by TSMC.

Q: Does the NVIDIA card support Vulkan?

A: No, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 has no Vulkan API support listed, whereas the AMD card supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R9 M265X | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi 2.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 1,950 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 332 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 575 MHz | Not specified |

| Boost Clock | 625 MHz | Not specified |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 96.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 336 |

| TMUs | 40 | 56 |

| ROPs | 16 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 10.00 GPixel/s | 10.91 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 25.00 GTexel/s | 43.62 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 800.0 GFLOPS | 1,046.3 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not specified | 160 W |

| Slot Width | Not specified | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not specified | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 450 W |

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

| Display Outputs | Not specified | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | Not specified |

| Card Length | Not specified | 210 mm (8.3 inches) |

| Release Date | 2014-03-20 | 2011-09-23 |

| Predecessor | Solar System | GeForce 200 |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | GeForce 500 |

The Verdict

The benchmark data shows a virtual tie between these two cards in the only measured test, with the AMD Radeon R9 M265X holding a 1.2% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. However, the specification differences tell a more nuanced story. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 offers substantially higher raw compute throughput (1,046.3 GFLOPS vs 800.0 GFLOPS), better texture rate (43.62 GTexel/s vs 25.00 GTexel/s), and more memory bandwidth (96.19 GB/s vs 64.00 GB/s). These advantages suggest it would likely outperform the AMD card in gaming workloads, despite losing the OpenCL test.

The AMD card counters with double the memory capacity (2 GB vs 1024 MB), a smaller and more efficient 28 nm process, and modern API support including Vulkan 1.2.170. Its lower power requirements and mobile-oriented design make it more suitable for laptops, while the NVIDIA card's 160 W TDP and dual-slot form factor clearly target desktop systems.

For users who prioritize compute performance in OpenCL workloads or need the larger memory buffer, the AMD Radeon R9 M265X is the data-supported choice. For those who value raw FP32 throughput, texture processing, or memory bandwidth, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 offers better specifications, though the measured benchmark does not confirm a performance win. Given the 44th percentile ranking for both and the minimal 1.2% benchmark delta, the data ultimately suggests either card would deliver comparable real-world performance, with the choice coming down to specific workload requirements and system compatibility. The NVIDIA card's launch MSRP was 199 USD, but no pricing is available for the AMD card.