AMD Radeon RX 460 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains two directly comparable workloads for these cards: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 dominates completely. The RTX 2060 scores 65,014 in OpenCL against 17,855 for the RX 460, a delta of -72.5% from the RTX 2060's perspective. That is a massive gap, roughly 3.6 times the RX 460's compute throughput in this test. The Vulkan result is similarly lopsided: 65,846 versus 20,198, a -69.3% delta. Again, the RTX 2060 lands over 3.2 times higher.

The RX 460 has no wins in the head-to-head set. Zero. Every recorded comparison goes to NVIDIA. The deltas are not close, and the pattern is consistent across both API workloads. OpenCL and Vulkan both stress raw shader throughput and memory bandwidth, and the RTX 2060's architecture simply has far more of both. The RX 460's best number, 20,198 in Vulkan, is still less than one-third of the RTX 2060's Vulkan score.

Looking at the broader database context, the RX 460's average benchmark score is 18,373, placing it at the 62nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are clustered tightly: the Intel Arc A770M at 18,383 (-0.1%), the AMD FirePro D500 at 18,533 (-0.9%), the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 at 18,189 (+1%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile at 18,159 (+1.2%). This tells you the RX 460 sits in a crowded mid-low pack, where a 1-2% swing moves it past or behind immediate neighbors. It is not an outlier in either direction.

The RTX 2060's average benchmark score is 15,290, which is lower than the RX 460's average despite winning the head-to-head. That seems counterintuitive until you check the percentile: the RTX 2060 sits at the 58th percentile of all GPUs, below the RX 460's 62nd. The reason is that the RTX 2060's average includes several PassMark tests where it posts very low scores: PassMark DirectX 12 at 53, DirectX 10 at 98, and DirectX 11 at 110. These legacy or specific workload scores drag the average down. Its nearest rivals reflect that mixed profile: the GTX 580 at 15,283 (0%), the AMD Radeon 680M at 15,270 (+0.1%), the RTX 3050 OEM at 15,199 (+0.6%), and the RX 7600 at 15,171 (+0.8%). The RTX 2060 is effectively tied with a 2010-era flagship in this aggregate metric, even though its modern workloads are far stronger.

The key takeaway from the raw numbers is that the head-to-head benchmarks measure only two API types, and both favor NVIDIA by a wide margin. The aggregate database scores tell a different story, one where the RX 460 actually ranks higher against the full GPU field. This is a reminder that "average score" and "head-to-head matchup" are not the same thing. The former includes a broad set of tests, some of which penalize the RTX 2060 heavily. The latter is a direct comparison on identical workloads, and on those workloads, the RTX 2060 is in another class.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, there is no contest in direct comparison. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 wins both head-to-head benchmarks, and it wins them by margins of roughly 70%. If your workload is OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the RTX 2060 is the only rational choice. The RX 460 cannot approach its throughput in these tests.

However, the database's aggregate metrics complicate the picture. The RX 460 posts a higher average benchmark score, 18,373 versus 15,290, and a higher percentile, 62 versus 58. This means the RX 460 performs better relative to the entire GPU population across the full test suite. The RTX 2060's average is dragged down by weak PassMark DirectX 10/11/12 results, which are not part of the head-to-head set. If your application relies on those specific DirectX paths, the RTX 2060's recorded performance is poor, and the RX 460 may serve you better.

Who should pick the RX 460? Anyone whose work is reflected in the broader database: the card's nearest rivals are all within 1.2%, meaning it is a stable, middle-of-the-pack performer in aggregate terms. It also requires a 250 W suggested PSU, draws 75 W TDP, and needs no power connectors. That is a very light system load. The RTX 2060 demands a 450 W PSU, a single 8-pin connector, and 160 W TDP. For a low-power build or a legacy system upgrade with limited PSU headroom, the RX 460 fits where the RTX 2060 cannot.

Who should pick the RTX 2060? Anyone running OpenCL or Vulkan compute workloads. The data shows a 3.6x and 3.2x advantage respectively. Those are not incremental gains; they are generational leaps. The RTX 2060 also carries 6 GB of GDDR6 memory versus 2 GB of GDDR5, and its memory bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s triples the RX 460's 112.0 GB/s. For any memory-hungry compute task, the RTX 2060 is the clear winner. The RX 460's 2 GB frame buffer is a hard ceiling for modern workloads.

The practical verdict: if you can afford the power draw and PSU requirements, the RTX 2060 wins outright on the two directly comparable tests. If you are constrained by system power or only care about aggregate database performance, the RX 460's numbers are surprisingly competitive, even slightly better. But "surprisingly competitive" only applies to the average, not to the head-to-head.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 460, with an average of 18,373 compared to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060's 15,290.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 2060 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX 2060 scores 65,014 against 17,855 for the RX 460, a delta of -72.5% from the RTX 2060's perspective.

Q: Does the RX 460 win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The RX 460 has zero wins in the head-to-head set, while the RTX 2060 has two.

Q: What is the memory size difference?

A: The RX 460 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the RTX 2060 has 6 GB of GDDR6. The RTX 2060's memory bandwidth is 336.0 GB/s versus 112.0 GB/s for the RX 460.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The RX 460 sits at the 62nd percentile, while the RTX 2060 is at the 58th percentile.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The RX 460 has a 75 W TDP and requires a 250 W suggested PSU. The RTX 2060 has a 160 W TDP and requires a 450 W suggested PSU.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification. The RTX 2060 uses a 12 nm process from TSMC, while the RX 460 uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The RTX 2060's chip, TU106, contains 10,800 million transistors on a 445 mm² die. The RX 460's Baffin chip has 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. Transistor density is nearly identical: 24.3M per mm² for the RTX 2060 and 24.4M per mm² for the RX 460.

Clock speeds favor NVIDIA. The RTX 2060 runs at 1365 MHz base and 1680 MHz boost. The RX 460 runs at 1090 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost. Memory clocks are the same base figure of 1750 MHz, but the effective data rate differs: 14 Gbps for the RTX 2060 versus 7 Gbps for the RX 460.

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. The RTX 2060 has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 460 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 112.0 GB/s. The compute resources follow the same pattern: the RTX 2060 has 1920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, while the RX 460 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rate is 80.64 GPixel/s versus 19.20 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 201.6 GTexel/s versus 67.20 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 6.451 TFLOPS versus 2.150 TFLOPS. The RTX 2060 also supports FP16 at 12.90 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the RX 460's FP16 is 2.150 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical requirements differ substantially. The RTX 2060 needs a 160 W TDP, a 450 W suggested PSU, and one 8-pin power connector. The RX 460 needs 75 W, a 250 W PSU, and no power connector. Both are dual-slot cards. The RTX 2060 measures 229 mm (9 inches) in length, 113 mm (4.4 inches) in height, and 35 mm (1.4 inches) in width. The RX 460 is 170 mm (6.7 inches) long. The RTX 2060 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the RX 460 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs also differ: the RTX 2060 has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C. The RX 460 has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Architecture Differences

The RX 460 is built on GCN 4.0, part of the Arctic Islands generation (RX 400 series). The RTX 2060 is built on Turing, part of the GeForce 20 series. These are fundamentally different architectures with different design goals. GCN 4.0 is a compute-oriented design from AMD, while Turing introduces dedicated hardware features that GCN lacks.

The most significant architectural difference is the presence of RT cores and tensor cores in the RTX 2060. It has 30 RT cores and 240 tensor cores. The RX 460 has neither. This means the RTX 2060 supports hardware-accelerated ray tracing and tensor-based operations, while the RX 460 relies entirely on traditional shader compute. The API support reflects this: the RTX 2060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 460 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. The RTX 2060's feature set is newer and more expansive.

The process nodes differ: 12 nm TSMC for the RTX 2060, 14 nm GlobalFoundries for the RX 460. Despite this, transistor density is almost identical, which suggests the architectural complexity, not the process, drives the RTX 2060's higher transistor count. The RTX 2060's die is 445 mm² versus 123 mm² for the RX 460, a 3.6x difference in area, and the transistor count is 10,800 million versus 3,000 million, a 3.6x difference there as well.

The FP16 implementation differs fundamentally. The RTX 2060 achieves 12.90 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it can do twice the FP16 work per clock as FP32. The RX 460's FP16 is exactly 1:1 with FP32, at 2.150 TFLOPS. This makes the RTX 2060 far more capable in workloads that can use half-precision math, which is common in machine learning and some graphics effects. The RX 460 has no such acceleration.

The memory architecture also reflects different design eras. The RTX 2060 uses GDDR6 with 14 Gbps effective speed and a 192-bit bus. The RX 460 uses GDDR5 with 7 Gbps effective speed and a 128-bit bus. The RTX 2060's memory subsystem delivers three times the bandwidth, which is critical for the larger frame buffer and compute workloads. The RX 460's 2 GB capacity is a limiting factor for modern games and applications, regardless of its compute capabilities.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 2060 wins in every directly comparable benchmark. OpenCL and Vulkan both go to NVIDIA by margins of 72.5% and 69.3% respectively. This makes it the obvious choice for compute-heavy workloads: GPU-accelerated rendering, machine learning inference, scientific simulation, or any task that runs through OpenCL or Vulkan compute pipelines. The 6 GB GDDR6 frame buffer and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth give it headroom for large datasets, and the tensor cores provide an edge in AI-related tasks even if those are not directly benchmarked here.

The RX 460 wins in the aggregate database context. Its average benchmark score of 18,373 is higher than the RTX 2060's 15,290, and its 62nd percentile rank beats the RTX 2060's 58th. This suggests that across the full range of recorded tests, which include PassMark DirectX 9/10/11/12, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute, the RX 460 performs more consistently relative to the field. Its nearest rivals are all within 1.2%, indicating it is a solid mid-tier performer that does not have catastrophic weak spots. The RTX 2060's PassMark DirectX scores are extremely low: 98 for DirectX 10, 110 for DirectX 11, and 53 for DirectX 12. These drag its average down significantly.

The RX 460 also wins on power efficiency and system integration. At 75 W TDP with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU, it can drop into almost any existing system. The RTX 2060 requires a 450 W PSU and an 8-pin connector. For a compact or legacy build, the RX 460 is the only option that fits the power budget. Its 170 mm length is also shorter than the RTX 2060's 229 mm, which matters for small form factor cases.

The RTX 2060 wins on architectural features. It has RT cores, tensor cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 460 lacks all of these. If you need hardware ray tracing or tensor acceleration, the RX 460 cannot provide it, and no benchmark in the database changes that. The RTX 2060's FP16 throughput at 12.90 TFLOPS is six times the RX 460's 2.150 TFLOPS, which is a decisive advantage in any half-precision workload.

For gamers, the RTX 2060's 6 GB memory and higher bandwidth make it the clear choice for modern titles, though the database does not include gaming benchmarks. For compute professionals, the RTX 2060's OpenCL and Vulkan scores are overwhelming. For users with tight power budgets, legacy systems, or workloads represented by the aggregate database, the RX 460's numbers are surprisingly competitive, and its lower system requirements are a real advantage. The data supports both picks, but for different reasons and in different contexts.