AMD Radeon RX 460 vs AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear, consistent advantage for the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL across every shared benchmark test. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX Vega M GL scores 19,549 against the RX 460's 17,855, a lead of 9.5%. The Vulkan test shows an even wider margin: the RX Vega M GL reaches 22,757 while the RX 460 manages 20,198, putting the Vega M GL 12.7% ahead. These are not marginal differences; they represent a meaningful performance tier gap in both compute and graphics API workloads.

Looking at the broader database context, the RX Vega M GL's average benchmark score of 21,153 places it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8970M at 21,237 (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile at 21,379 (1.1% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 at 21,035 (0.6% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT at 20,713 (2.1% behind). This places the RX Vega M GL in a competitive mid-to-upper segment where it trades blows with dedicated desktop and mobile graphics solutions.

The RX 460, by contrast, averages 18,373 across its benchmark suite, sitting in the 62nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Arc A770M at 18,383 (0.1% ahead), the AMD FirePro D500 at 18,533 (0.9% ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 at 18,189 (1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile at 18,159 (1.2% behind). The RX 460's position among these rivals shows it competing in a lower performance bracket, roughly 13% behind the RX Vega M GL in average score.

The Vulkan delta of 12.7% is particularly telling. Vulkan is a low-overhead API that tends to expose raw hardware throughput, and the RX Vega M GL's advantage there suggests its architectural resources translate directly into real-world compute efficiency. The OpenCL gap of 9.5% reinforces this pattern, showing that the RX Vega M GL's superiority is not limited to a single workload type.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL has an average benchmark score of 21,153, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 460's 18,373. The RX Vega M GL also holds a higher percentile ranking at 66 versus 62 for the RX 460.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Vulkan workloads?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the RX Vega M GL scores 22,757 against the RX 460's 20,198, which is a 12.7% advantage for the RX Vega M GL.

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: The RX Vega M GL uses 4 GB of HBM2 memory on a 1024-bit bus with 179.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 460 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RX Vega M GL has 1,280 shading units, while the RX 460 has 896. The RX Vega M GL also has more texture mapping units (80 versus 56) and more render output units (32 versus 16).

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The API feature sets are identical.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The RX Vega M GL has a TDP of 65 W, while the RX 460 has a TDP of 75 W. The RX 460 is a dual-slot card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W, whereas the RX Vega M GL is an integrated graphics processor with no separate power connector requirement.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture and manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, but they diverge significantly in their physical implementation. The RX Vega M GL uses the Polaris 22 chip and belongs to the Vega (Vega M) generation. It packs 5,000 million transistors into a 208 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.0 million per mm². The RX 460 uses the Baffin chip from the Arctic Islands (RX 400) generation, with 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die and a slightly higher transistor density of 24.4 million per mm².

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The RX Vega M GL employs 4 GB of HBM2 memory with a 1024-bit bus and 179.2 GB/s of bandwidth, a high-bandwidth, low-power solution that suits its integrated nature. The RX 460 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega M GL's memory bandwidth advantage of roughly 60% is a direct result of the wide HBM2 interface, which also explains its superior performance in memory-intensive compute workloads.

The execution resources also differ substantially. The RX Vega M GL has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The RX 460 has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and only 16 render output units. This gives the Vega M GL exactly 50% more texture mapping units and double the render output units, which directly impacts pixel fill and texture throughput. The pixel rate of the RX Vega M GL is 32.35 GPixel/s versus 19.20 GPixel/s for the RX 460, and the texture rate is 80.88 GTexel/s versus 67.20 GTexel/s.

Both GPUs deliver FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, so there is no mixed-precision acceleration difference. The RX Vega M GL achieves 2.588 TFLOPS FP32, while the RX 460 achieves 2.150 TFLOPS. Neither GPU has ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The RX Vega M GL has a base clock of 931 MHz and a boost clock of 1011 MHz, while the RX 460 runs higher clocks at 1090 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost. Despite the RX 460's higher clock speeds, the RX Vega M GL's larger execution resource pool wins out in throughput.

Memory configuration differences are stark: 4 GB HBM2 versus 2 GB GDDR5, 1024-bit versus 128-bit bus, and 179.2 GB/s versus 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is 700 MHz (1400 Mbps effective) for the Vega M GL and 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) for the RX 460.

The RX Vega M GL is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 65 W TDP, no power connectors, and a bus interface of IGP. The RX 460 is a dual-slot discrete card with a 75 W TDP, no power connectors, a suggested PSU of 250 W, a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, and dimensions of 170 mm (6.7 inches) in length. Display outputs also differ: the RX Vega M GL is portable-device dependent, while the RX 460 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a.

The release dates are separated by roughly a year and a half. The RX 460 was released on 2016-08-07, and the RX Vega M GL followed on 2018-01-31. Both GPUs are end-of-life products. The RX 460 lists its predecessor as Pirate Islands and its successor as Polaris, while the RX Vega M GL has no recorded predecessor or successor. Neither GPU has a recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The RX Vega M GL wins in every recorded head-to-head comparison. Its OpenCL score of 19,549 surpasses the RX 460's 17,855 by 9.5%, and its Vulkan score of 22,757 beats the RX 460's 20,198 by 12.7%. The average benchmark score of 21,153 versus 18,373 confirms the overall superiority. The Vega M GL also wins decisively in raw specification categories: more shading units, more texture mapping units, double the render output units, more memory capacity, a wider memory bus, higher memory bandwidth, and higher FP32 throughput.

The RX 460's wins are narrower and limited to specific physical characteristics. It has a higher base clock (1090 MHz versus 931 MHz) and a higher boost clock (1200 MHz versus 1011 MHz). It also has a higher transistor density (24.4M per mm² versus 24.0M per mm²) and a smaller die (123 mm² versus 208 mm²). Its memory runs at a higher effective speed (7 Gbps versus 1400 Mbps), and it offers a standard PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface with discrete display outputs, making it a drop-in card for desktop systems. The RX 460's higher clock speeds, however, do not compensate for the Vega M GL's larger resource pool in any benchmark result.

For use cases, the RX Vega M GL appears better suited to compute-heavy workloads and applications that leverage Vulkan or OpenCL, given its consistent double-digit lead in those tests. Its 4 GB HBM2 memory with 179.2 GB/s bandwidth also gives it an advantage in memory-bound tasks. The RX 460, while slower in absolute terms, offers a conventional discrete card form factor with standard display outputs, which may be preferable for systems requiring a dedicated add-in card rather than an integrated solution.

The Verdict

The data makes the choice straightforward for raw performance: the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL is the stronger GPU in every measured benchmark. Its 9.5% OpenCL lead and 12.7% Vulkan lead over the RX 460 are consistent with its higher average score of 21,153 versus 18,373 and its superior specification profile across shading units, TMUs, ROPs, memory capacity, bus width, and bandwidth.

The RX 460 does retain relevance for systems that require a discrete dual-slot card with a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface and standard display outputs. Its smaller die, lower transistor count, and higher clock speeds make it a compact, low-power option with a 75 W TDP and no external power connectors. But the benchmark results show that these advantages do not translate into higher performance.

Choose the RX Vega M GL if the workload demands maximum throughput in OpenCL or Vulkan, or if the system can benefit from 4 GB of HBM2 memory and 179.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Choose the RX 460 if the requirement is a conventional discrete card with standard display outputs and a PCIe interface, and if the performance deficit of roughly 13% in average score is acceptable. For pure performance, the RX Vega M GL is the clear winner in the recorded data.