AMD Radeon RX 460 vs NVIDIA T400 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 460 records an average benchmark score of 18373, while the NVIDIA T400 scores 16508. The RX 460 sits at the 62nd percentile of all GPUs, compared to the T400's 60th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap between the two cards in Vulkan compute?

A: The RX 460 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with 20198 points versus the T400's 15976 points, a 26.4% advantage. This is the largest delta between the two in any recorded benchmark.

Q: What memory technologies do these cards use?

A: The RX 460 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The T400 uses 2 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 80.00 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The NVIDIA T400 boosts to 1425 MHz, while the AMD Radeon RX 460 boosts to 1200 MHz. Notably, the T400's base clock is much lower at 420 MHz compared to the RX 460's 1090 MHz base clock.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The T400 has a 30 W TDP and a suggested power supply of 200 W, while the RX 460 has a 75 W TDP and a suggested power supply of 250 W. Neither card requires external power connectors.

Q: Which card supports a newer version of Vulkan?

A: The NVIDIA T400 supports Vulkan 1.4, whereas the AMD Radeon RX 460 supports Vulkan 1.3. Both cards support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6, though the T400's DirectX feature level is 12_1 versus the RX 460's 12_0.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly across the two recorded tests, and both times the AMD Radeon RX 460 comes out ahead. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 460 scores 17855 against the T400's 17039, a 4.8% margin. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 460 extends that lead to 26.4%, scoring 20198 versus 15976. The T400 does not win either of the two head-to-head tests, so the database records 2 wins for AMD and 0 for NVIDIA.

That said, the T400's profile suggests a different kind of utility. Its 30 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors make it a low-footprint option for compact or power-constrained systems. The RX 460 is a dual-slot card with a 75 W TDP, still modest but requiring more thermal and physical clearance. If the task is compute-heavy and the workload scales with raw throughput, the RX 460 is the stronger choice. If the priority is minimal power draw and a smaller physical footprint, the T400 has the structural advantage, though its benchmark scores trail in both recorded tests.

The RX 460 also wins on memory bandwidth, with 112.0 GB/s versus 80.00 GB/s, and it carries a wider 128-bit bus. The T400 counters with faster GDDR6 memory and a higher boost clock, but those attributes do not translate into a benchmark victory in the data. For any user choosing strictly on measured performance, the RX 460 leads. For users prioritizing efficiency and form factor, the T400 remains a distinct option, just not one that wins any compute benchmark in this comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages and process nodes. The AMD Radeon RX 460 uses the Baffin chip built on GCN 4.0, part of the Arctic Islands generation (RX 400 series), fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. The chip contains 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.4M per mm². The NVIDIA T400 uses the TU117 chip on the Turing architecture, part of the Quadro Turing (Tx000) generation, built by TSMC on a 12 nm process. That die holds 4,700 million transistors across 200 mm², for a density of 23.5M per mm².

The architectural philosophies diverge in compute layout. The RX 460 fields 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The T400 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Despite having fewer than half the shading units, the T400 reaches a higher boost clock of 1425 MHz versus 1200 MHz, but its FP32 throughput of 1,094.4 GFLOPS still trails the RX 460's 2.150 TFLOPS. Interestingly, the T400's FP16 output is 2.189 TFLOPS in a 2:1 ratio, slightly ahead of the RX 460's 2.150 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

Neither card includes ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so those features do not differentiate them. The memory subsystems differ: the RX 460 pairs 2 GB GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the T400 pairs 2 GB GDDR6 with a 64-bit bus and 80.00 GB/s bandwidth. The T400's memory clock is 1250 MHz with 10 Gbps effective, versus the RX 460's 1750 MHz with 7 Gbps effective. The architecture differences show up in API support as well: the T400 supports DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4, while the RX 460 supports DirectX 12_0 and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge on almost every core specification. The RX 460 has a base clock of 1090 MHz and a boost clock of 1200 MHz, while the T400 has a 420 MHz base and a 1425 MHz boost. The RX 460's memory runs at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) on a 128-bit bus; the T400's runs at 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) on a 64-bit bus. Bandwidth favors AMD at 112.0 GB/s versus 80.00 GB/s.

Compute resources differ sharply. The RX 460 has 896 shading units and 56 TMUs; the T400 has 384 shading units and 24 TMUs. Both have 16 ROPs. Pixel rate favors the T400 at 22.80 GPixel/s versus 19.20 GPixel/s, but texture rate favors the RX 460 at 67.20 GTexel/s versus 34.20 GTexel/s. FP32 output is 2.150 TFLOPS for AMD and 1,094.4 GFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 output is nearly identical: 2.150 TFLOPS for the RX 460 and 2.189 TFLOPS for the T400.

Power and physical specs also differ. The T400 draws 30 W with a 200 W suggested PSU, while the RX 460 draws 75 W with a 250 W suggested PSU. The T400 is a single-slot card with three mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs; the RX 460 is a dual-slot card with one DVI, one HDMI 2.0b, and one DisplayPort 1.4a. The RX 460 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, the T400 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The RX 460 measures 170 mm (6.7 inches) in length; the T400 has no recorded dimensions. Both cards are end-of-life, with the RX 460 released in August 2016 and the T400 in May 2021.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons between these GPUs. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX 460 scores 17855 against the NVIDIA T400's 17039, a 4.8% lead. That is a moderate margin, suggesting the two cards are relatively close in OpenCL compute workloads. The RX 460's higher shading unit count and wider memory bus likely contribute to this edge, though the T400's higher boost clock narrows the gap.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a different story. The RX 460 scores 20198, while the T400 scores 15976, a 26.4% advantage for AMD. This is a substantial delta, indicating that the RX 460 handles Vulkan compute workloads far more efficiently relative to the T400. The RX 460's Vulkan score is also its strongest benchmark result, exceeding its OpenCL score by over 2300 points. The T400, by contrast, scores lower in Vulkan than in OpenCL, with a difference of about 1063 points in the opposite direction.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces these results. The RX 460's average score of 18373 places it within 0.1% of the Intel Arc A770M (18383) and 0.9% below the AMD FirePro D500 (18533). It is 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (18189) and 1.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (18159). The T400's average of 16508 sits effectively level with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 (16504), 0.6% ahead of both the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 (16415) and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (16408), and 0.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT (16361). The RX 460's closest rival cluster sits roughly 1800 points higher than the T400's, which quantifies the overall performance gap between the two cards.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear winner for compute performance: the AMD Radeon RX 460 wins both head-to-head benchmarks, including a commanding 26.4% margin in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 18373 is 11.3% higher than the T400's 16508, and it sits at a higher percentile among all GPUs (62nd versus 60th). For anyone prioritizing raw compute throughput, particularly in Vulkan workloads, the RX 460 is the better choice.

The NVIDIA T400 still has a role. Its 30 W TDP is less than half the RX 460's 75 W, and its single-slot design with three mini-DisplayPort outputs suits multi-display setups in compact workstations. Its higher boost clock of 1425 MHz and FP16 throughput of 2.189 TFLOPS show architectural strengths that do not surface in the recorded OpenCL and Vulkan tests. The T400 also supports a newer DirectX feature level (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, which may matter for specific software compatibility.

The choice depends on the workload. The RX 460 wins on measured compute performance, memory bandwidth, texture rate, and FP32 output. The T400 wins on power efficiency, physical footprint, and API version support. The database shows two wins for the RX 460 and none for the T400, so on benchmark results alone, the AMD card is the stronger performer. The T400 remains a viable option only when its low power draw and single-slot form factor take priority over compute speed.