AMD Radeon RX 460 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile and AMD Radeon RX 460 represent two vastly different eras of mobile graphics, separated by seven years of architectural evolution. The RTX 4050 Mobile is an active, modern Ada Lovelace part built for current laptops, while the RX 460 is an end-of-life Polaris-era card from 2016. Benchmark data shows the RTX 4050 Mobile dominates in every measurable compute test, yet the comparison reveals more than just a generational gap—it highlights fundamental shifts in GPU design priorities, from raw rasterization to feature-rich, highly efficient architectures.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result comes from the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile scores 74,748 points against the AMD Radeon RX 460’s 17,855 points. That is a 318.6% advantage for the NVIDIA part—a margin that completely dwarfs the difference in their average benchmark scores. While the two GPUs sit close in overall percentile rankings (63rd vs 62nd percentile among all GPUs), the OpenCL gap shows just how far compute performance has come; the RTX 4050 Mobile is not merely faster, it is in a different performance class entirely.

Vulkan results follow the same pattern, though slightly less extreme. The RTX 4050 Mobile posts 75,235 points in Geekbench Vulkan, versus 20,198 for the RX 460, a 272.5% lead. Interestingly, the RX 460’s Vulkan score is actually its strongest benchmark—it outperforms its own OpenCL result by over 2,300 points—while the RTX 4050 Mobile’s Vulkan and OpenCL scores are nearly identical, differing by less than 500 points. This suggests the older GCN architecture benefits disproportionately from Vulkan’s low-level API, but even that optimization cannot close a gap that approaches threefold.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the RTX 4050 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 19,049, which places it just 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 and 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation. The RX 460’s average of 18,373 puts it in a similar tier, just 0.1% behind the Intel Arc A770M and 1.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile. When placed side-by-side, the RTX 4050 Mobile leads the RX 460 by roughly 3.7% in average score—a modest edge that seems almost contradictory given the compute results, until you remember that the RX 460’s benchmark pool includes only Geekbench tests, while the RTX 4050 Mobile’s includes PassMark scores across DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, plus G2D and G3D tests.

The PassMark data for the RTX 4050 Mobile tells a more nuanced story. Its DirectX 9 score of 184 and DirectX 10 score of 79 suggest strong legacy API performance, but its DirectX 12 score of 61 is significantly lower—a pattern that hints at driver optimizations favoring older APIs or a thermal/power profile that limits sustained modern workloads. The G3D score of 14,423 and GPU compute score of 5,947 round out a comprehensive picture: this is a GPU that excels at general graphics throughput but shows surprising variance across DirectX versions.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4050 Mobile in OpenCL compute?

A: The RTX 4050 Mobile scores 74,748 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 318.6% higher than the RX 460’s 17,855. This represents the single largest performance delta between the two cards.

Q: Does the RX 460 perform better in any benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the RTX 4050 Mobile wins both tested benchmarks—Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan—with winsA equal to 2 and winsB equal to 0.

Q: Why is the average benchmark score difference so small if the compute gap is huge?

A: The average scores are calculated from different benchmark suites. The RTX 4050 Mobile’s average of 19,049 includes nine tests (PassMark and Geekbench), while the RX 460’s average of 18,373 includes only three Geekbench tests. The RX 460’s Vulkan score of 20,198 and Metal score of 17,065 pull its average up, while the RTX 4050 Mobile’s lower PassMark DirectX scores drag its average down.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The RTX 4050 Mobile sits in the 63rd percentile among all GPUs, while the RX 460 is in the 62nd percentile. Despite the massive compute lead, their overall performance rankings are nearly identical.

Q: Which GPUs are closest to the RTX 4050 Mobile in performance?

A: The nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6600 (0.1% behind), NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (0.1% behind), NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation (0.5% behind), and NVIDIA Tesla K20m (0.2% ahead).

Q: How does the RTX 4050 Mobile compare to the RTX 3060 Mobile?

A: The RTX 4050 Mobile is not directly compared to the RTX 3060 Mobile in the head-to-head data. However, the RX 460 is 1.2% ahead of the RTX 3060 Mobile in average benchmark score, which indirectly places the RTX 4050 Mobile well ahead of the RTX 3060 Mobile.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is profound and explains nearly every performance and feature gap. The RTX 4050 Mobile uses the AD107 chip built on TSMC’s 5 nm process, packing 18,900 million transistors into a 159 mm² die—a transistor density of 118.9 million per square millimeter. The RX 460, by contrast, uses the Baffin chip on GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm process, with just 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding 24.4 million transistors per square millimeter. That is nearly a 5x difference in transistor density, enabling the RTX 4050 Mobile to fit 2,560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs—versus 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 16 ROPs on the RX 460.

The RTX 4050 Mobile also introduces hardware that simply did not exist in the GCN 4.0 era: 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores. The RX 460 has none. This explains the DirectX version support difference—the RTX 4050 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) while the RX 460 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0)—and the Vulkan API gap, with 1.4 support on the NVIDIA part versus 1.3 on the AMD part. The feature set is not just about raw performance; it is about enabling workloads like ray-traced lighting and AI-accelerated effects that the RX 460 cannot handle at all.

Memory architecture further separates the two. The RTX 4050 Mobile uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 460 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. While the RX 460 has a wider bus, the RTX 4050 Mobile’s newer memory technology gives it 71% more bandwidth overall. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the RTX 4050 Mobile boosts to 1755 MHz (from a 1455 MHz base), while the RX 460 boosts to 1200 MHz (from 1090 MHz). In terms of throughput, the RTX 4050 Mobile delivers 8.986 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 140.4 GTexel/s texture fill, and 84.24 GPixel/s pixel throughput—versus 2.150 TFLOPS, 67.20 GTexel/s, and 19.20 GPixel/s for the RX 460.

The Verdict

The data makes the choice straightforward for anyone needing modern graphics features. The RTX 4050 Mobile is the clear winner for current gaming and compute workloads, offering 318.6% higher OpenCL performance and 272.5% higher Vulkan performance than the RX 460. Its 6 GB VRAM versus 2 GB is not just a capacity difference; it is the difference between fitting modern game assets and running out of memory. The RTX 4050 Mobile’s ray tracing and tensor cores open up entirely new rendering techniques that the RX 460 cannot execute, and its DirectX 12 Ultimate support future-proofs it for upcoming titles.

That said, the RX 460 is not without a niche. Its 75 W TDP is higher than the RTX 4050 Mobile’s 50 W, but it is a dual-slot card with no power connector and a 250 W suggested PSU, meaning it can slot into older systems with minimal power delivery requirements. For legacy software—particularly DirectX 9 and 10 era titles—the RX 460’s simpler architecture may offer fewer driver overhead issues, though the RTX 4050 Mobile’s PassMark DirectX 9 score of 184 suggests it handles those workloads adequately. The RX 460’s 170 mm length also makes it suitable for compact builds.

Ultimately, the RTX 4050 Mobile is the superior GPU by every measurable benchmark metric, but it is also a fundamentally different product—a power-sipping IGP-class mobile chip designed for laptops, versus a desktop card from a bygone era. The RX 460’s 62nd percentile ranking is respectable for a 2016 part, but it is a legacy product with no path forward. The RTX 4050 Mobile’s 63rd percentile ranking, combined with its massive compute lead, shows that modern efficiency and feature integration have become the dominant forces in GPU design. For new buyers, the RTX 4050 Mobile is the only rational choice; for retro builders, the RX 460 remains a functional, if dated, option.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile | AMD Radeon RX 460 |

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

| Process Node | 5 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 18,900 million | 3,000 million |

| Die Size | 159 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1455 MHz | 1090 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1755 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 96 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 112.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2560 | 896 |

| TMUs | 80 | 56 |

| ROPs | 48 | 16 |

| RT Cores | 20 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 80 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 84.24 GPixel/s | 19.20 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 140.4 GTexel/s | 67.20 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Compute | 8.986 TFLOPS | 2.150 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 50 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Suggested PSU | None | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2023-01-02 | 2016-08-07 |