AMD Radeon R9 M360 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R9 M360 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 represent two very different eras of GPU design, and the benchmark data shows a narrow but decisive edge for the newer AMD part. In the single available head-to-head test, the R9 M360 outperforms the GTX 460, but the story is more nuanced when you consider the architectural chasm between a 2015 mobile chip and a 2010 desktop card. The data indicates that while the AMD part wins on raw compute in OpenCL, the GTX 460 holds its own in specific rasterization metrics, making the choice highly dependent on workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it shows a close contest. The AMD Radeon R9 M360 scores 8,211, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 scores 7,925. That translates to a 3.6% advantage for the AMD part, which is a slim but definitive win. The R9 M360’s average benchmark score across all tests is 8,129, compared to the GTX 460’s 7,925, reinforcing that the AMD chip is consistently a few percentage points ahead in compute workloads.

Looking at the broader context, the R9 M360 sits at the 42nd percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 460 sits at the 41st. That single-percentile gap mirrors the head-to-head delta. The AMD card’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, which scores 8,135 and is only 0.1% ahead, meaning the R9 M360 is effectively trading blows with a much newer mainstream mobile GPU. On the other side, the GTX 460’s closest competitor is the NVIDIA Quadro K4100M at 7,906, which the GTX 460 beats by 0.2%, and it trails the Quadro P5000 by 1.4%. This tells you that the GTX 460, despite its age, is still competitive in synthetic compute tests with professional and mid-range parts from several years later.

Where the GTX 460 does not win is in Vulkan, as it has no Vulkan score listed, while the R9 M360 posts 8,047 in that test. This is a significant functional advantage for the AMD card, as it can run modern Vulkan-based applications, whereas the GTX 460 is limited to OpenCL and DirectX 12 (11_0) paths. The delta between the R9 M360’s OpenCL and Vulkan scores is only about 2%, showing consistent performance across different APIs, which is a sign of a more modern driver stack and hardware design.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360 has an average benchmark score of 8,129, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 has an average of 7,925. The AMD part is 3.6% faster in the direct OpenCL comparison.

Q: Does the GTX 460 support Vulkan?

A: No. The GTX 460’s API list includes DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but no Vulkan version is specified. The R9 M360, in contrast, supports Vulkan 1.2.170 and scores 8,047 in Geekbench Vulkan.

Q: How does the R9 M360 compare to its nearest rival, the GTX 950M?

A: The R9 M360’s average score is 8,129, and the GTX 950M’s is 8,135. The delta is -0.1%, meaning the NVIDIA GTX 950M is marginally ahead, but the difference is negligible for practical purposes.

Q: What is the GTX 460’s closest competitor in the data?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4100M, with an average score of 7,906, is 0.2% behind the GTX 460. The GTX 460 also trails the Quadro P5000 by 1.4% and the GTX 880M by 1.4%.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360 has a pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s, which is significantly higher than the GTX 460’s 9.450 GPixel/s. This suggests the AMD card handles fill-rate-bound scenarios better.

Q: Are both cards end-of-life?

A: Yes, both the AMD Radeon R9 M360 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 have a production status of "End-of-life." The R9 M360 was released in May 2015, while the GTX 460 was released in July 2010.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast, reflecting nearly five years of development. The AMD Radeon R9 M360 is built on GCN 1.0 architecture with the Tropo chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,500 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460, by contrast, uses the Fermi architecture with the GF104 chip, built on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 1,950 million transistors on a much larger 332 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 5.9 million per square millimeter.

The R9 M360’s newer process node allows it to achieve higher clock speeds and efficiency despite having fewer transistors. Its base clock is 900 MHz with a boost of 925 MHz, while the GTX 460 has no listed base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective). The AMD card’s shading unit count is 512, compared to 336 for the GTX 460, giving it a significant advantage in compute-heavy tasks. However, the GTX 460 has more texture mapping units (56 vs. 32) and more ROPs (24 vs. 16), which explains why its texture rate is higher at 37.80 GTexel/s versus 29.60 GTexel/s for the AMD card.

Memory architecture also diverges. The R9 M360 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 460 uses only 768 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, which gives it higher bandwidth at 86.40 GB/s despite the smaller capacity. The GTX 460’s memory clock is 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective), while the R9 M360’s memory clock is 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective), but the wider bus on the NVIDIA card compensates for the lower clock. In terms of API support, the R9 M360 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 460 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but lacks Vulkan.

Specification Differences

The R9 M360 and GTX 460 differ on nearly every measurable specification. The AMD card has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 925 MHz; the GTX 460 has no base or boost clock listed. Memory capacity is 4 GB for the R9 M360 versus 768 MB for the GTX 460, a five-fold difference. The bus width is 128-bit for AMD and 192-bit for NVIDIA, but the R9 M360’s higher memory clock (1125 MHz vs. 900 MHz) results in lower overall bandwidth (72.00 GB/s vs. 86.40 GB/s).

Shading units are 512 on the R9 M360 versus 336 on the GTX 460. TMUs are 32 vs. 56, and ROPs are 16 vs. 24. The pixel rate is 14.80 GPixel/s for AMD versus 9.450 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. The texture rate is 29.60 GTexel/s for AMD versus 37.80 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32 performance is 947.2 GFLOPS on the R9 M360 versus 907.2 GFLOPS on the GTX 460, a 4.4% advantage for AMD.

The GTX 460 has a TDP of 160 W, while the R9 M360 has no TDP listed. The GTX 460 is a dual-slot card requiring two 6-pin power connectors and a 450 W suggested PSU, with a length of 210 mm (8.3 inches). The R9 M360 has no listed slot width, power connectors, or dimensions. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 for AMD versus PCIe 2.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are not listed for the R9 M360, while the GTX 460 has 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a. The GTX 460 has a launch MSRP of 199 USD; the R9 M360 has no launch MSRP listed.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the AMD Radeon R9 M360 is the more capable compute GPU. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 3.6% in OpenCL, has a higher average benchmark score (8,129 vs. 7,925), and sits at a higher percentile (42nd vs. 41st). It also offers Vulkan support, which the GTX 460 lacks entirely, making it the more future-proof choice for modern applications.

However, the GTX 460 is not obsolete in every regard. Its higher texture rate (37.80 GTexel/s vs. 29.60 GTexel/s) and higher memory bandwidth (86.40 GB/s vs. 72.00 GB/s) suggest it may perform better in texture-bound or bandwidth-sensitive workloads. The GTX 460 also has more TMUs and ROPs, which could translate to better performance in certain rasterization scenarios despite its lower pixel rate.

For a builder choosing between these two, the R9 M360 is the logical pick for general compute, Vulkan-based games, or any workload that benefits from higher FP32 throughput and more VRAM. The GTX 460, while older and with less memory, still has a role in legacy DirectX 11 applications where its texture throughput and bandwidth can shine. The data does not support calling the GTX 460 a clear winner in any category, but it does show that the AMD card is the more balanced and modern option.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R9 M360 wins decisively in raw compute performance. Its FP32 output of 947.2 GFLOPS exceeds the GTX 460’s 907.2 GFLOPS, and its pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s is over 50% higher than the GTX 460’s 9.450 GPixel/s. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the R9 M360’s 8,211 score beats the GTX 460’s 7,925, and its Vulkan score of 8,047 demonstrates capability in a modern API the NVIDIA card cannot access. The 4 GB memory capacity is also a clear win for AMD, allowing larger textures and datasets to reside on the GPU.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 wins in texture throughput and memory bandwidth. Its 37.80 GTexel/s texture rate is 27.7% higher than the R9 M360’s 29.60 GTexel/s, and its 86.40 GB/s memory bandwidth is 20% higher. With 56 TMUs and 24 ROPs versus 32 and 16 respectively, the GTX 460 is structurally better suited for fill-rate-limited tasks that rely on texture fetches and pixel output. Its 192-bit memory bus also gives it an advantage in bandwidth-sensitive scenarios, even though the R9 M360’s memory runs at a higher effective speed.

In practical terms, the R9 M360 is the better all-rounder for modern workloads, especially those using Vulkan or requiring large frame buffers. The GTX 460 is a specialist that can still compete in narrow scenarios, but its age and lack of Vulkan support make it a hard sell for anything beyond legacy applications. The data shows one win for the R9 M360 in direct benchmarks and zero for the GTX 460, but the architectural numbers suggest the NVIDIA card has niche strengths worth acknowledging.