AMD Radeon Vega 8 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 Comparison

AMD Radeon Vega 8 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 represent two very different approaches to GPU design, separated by seven years of architectural evolution. The data shows a tight contest: the AMD integrated processor edges out the older discrete card in the single available head-to-head benchmark, with an average benchmark score of 9221 against 8743. The Vega 8 sits at the 45th percentile among all GPUs, while the GTX 460 v2 lands at the 44th percentile, making them statistical neighbors in overall performance despite their generational and form-factor differences.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable workload is Geekbench OpenCL, where the AMD Radeon Vega 8 scores 8822 against the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2's 8743. This translates to a 0.9% delta in favor of the AMD part — a margin that is effectively negligible in real-world terms, but it does establish a clear directional result. The Vega 8 wins the sole head-to-head test, giving it a 1–0 record in the wins column.

Contextualizing this result against their respective nearest rivals clarifies the picture. The Vega 8's average score of 9221 places it 0.6% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (9273) and 0.8% behind the GTX 465 (9294), yet 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon 890M (9210). The GTX 460 v2's average of 8743 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8746, 0% delta) and 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (8686), while trailing the AMD Radeon R9 M265X (8851) by 1.2% and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8863) by 1.4%. These narrow margins underscore that both GPUs occupy a crowded performance band where single-digit percentage differences separate dozens of products.

The raw compute figures support the benchmark outcome. The Vega 8 delivers 1,126.4 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput, which is 7.6% higher than the GTX 460 v2's 1,046.3 GFLOPS. This advantage in raw shader math aligns with its OpenCL victory. However, the NVIDIA card fights back in other throughput metrics: it achieves 43.62 GTexel/s texture fill rate versus 35.20 GTexel/s for the AMD part, a 24% advantage, and 10.91 GPixel/s pixel rate versus 8.800 GPixel/s, a 24% lead. The GTX 460 v2 also has substantially more memory bandwidth at 96.19 GB/s compared to the Vega 8's system-dependent shared memory configuration, which can bottleneck depending on the host platform's RAM.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Vega 8 wins in compute-heavy workloads that leverage its newer architecture and higher FP32 throughput. Its 512 shading units, while fewer in count than expected given its transistor budget, operate at a boost clock of 1100 MHz with a base of 300 MHz, and the architecture supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3 — both modern API standards that the NVIDIA card lacks or only partially supports. The Vega 8's OpenCL score of 8822 and its Vulkan score of 8134 indicate strong performance in heterogeneous compute and modern graphics APIs, making it the better choice for applications that can utilize these interfaces.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 wins in traditional rasterization throughput and memory-bound scenarios. Its 56 texture mapping units and 24 ROPs, combined with a 192-bit memory bus and 96.19 GB/s of dedicated GDDR5 bandwidth, give it a decisive edge in fill-rate-limited scenes and high-resolution texture work. The card's 10.91 GPixel/s pixel rate and 43.62 GTexel/s texture rate are both roughly 24% higher than the Vega 8's figures, which suggests it can sustain better performance in older DirectX 11 titles or applications that rely heavily on texture fetch and pixel output. The dedicated 1024 MB of VRAM also eliminates the variable of system memory contention that affects the Vega 8.

For compute, the Vega 8's FP32 output of 1,126.4 GFLOPS is 7.6% higher than the GTX 460 v2's 1,046.3 GFLOPS, and the AMD part additionally supports FP16 at 2.253 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), a feature entirely absent from the NVIDIA specification. This makes the Vega 8 more suitable for machine learning inference or scientific workloads that can exploit half-precision arithmetic.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is vast. The AMD Radeon Vega 8 is built on GCN 5.0 architecture using a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, packing 4,940 million transistors into a 210 mm² die — a transistor density of 23.5 million per square millimeter. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) part of the Raven Ridge APU family, with a 25 W TDP and no dedicated power connectors, drawing from the system's power delivery. Its memory subsystem is entirely system-shared, with no dedicated VRAM, no fixed bus width, and bandwidth that is dependent on the host's memory configuration.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 uses the older Fermi 2.0 architecture on a 40 nm TSMC process, with 1,950 million transistors spread across a much larger 332 mm² die, yielding just 5.9 million transistors per square millimeter. This is a discrete dual-slot card with a 160 W TDP, requiring two 6-pin power connectors and a 450 W suggested power supply. It features 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 96.19 GB/s of fixed bandwidth. The card connects via PCIe 2.0 x16, whereas the Vega 8 is directly integrated into the motherboard.

Core configuration differs significantly. The Vega 8 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The GTX 460 v2 has 336 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. This inversion — more shaders but fewer TMUs/ROPs on the AMD side — explains the throughput tradeoffs observed in benchmarks. The NVIDIA card's higher ROP and TMU counts give it superior pixel and texture processing, while the AMD card's larger shader array with higher clocks (1100 MHz boost vs. a memory clock of 1002 MHz with 4 Gbps effective) drives its compute advantage.

API support also diverges. The Vega 8 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The GTX 460 v2 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed. The AMD part's newer feature set makes it more future-proof for modern software, while the NVIDIA card is constrained to older API paths.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 8 has an average benchmark score of 9221, compared to 8743 for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, a difference of roughly 5.5% in favor of the AMD part.

Q: How do the two compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 8 scores 8822, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 scores 8743, giving the AMD part a 0.9% win in the only head-to-head benchmark available.

Q: What are the key memory differences?

A: The GTX 460 v2 has 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus with 96.19 GB/s bandwidth. The Vega 8 uses system-shared memory with no fixed size, type, or bus width; its bandwidth is system-dependent.

Q: Which card has better texture and pixel fill rates?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 achieves 43.62 GTexel/s and 10.91 GPixel/s, which are approximately 24% higher than the Vega 8's 35.20 GTexel/s and 8.800 GPixel/s.

Q: Does either GPU support modern APIs like Vulkan?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 8 supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_1). The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The Vega 8 packs 4,940 million transistors into 210 mm² (23.5 million per mm²) on a 14 nm process. The GTX 460 v2 uses 1,950 million transistors across 332 mm² (5.9 million per mm²) on a 40 nm process.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Vega 8 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Fermi 2.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 40 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 4,940 million | 1,950 million |

| Die Size | 210 mm² | 332 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 23.5M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 300 MHz | — |

| Boost Clock | 1100 MHz | — |

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 1002 MHz / 4 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 96.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 336 |

| TMUs | 32 | 56 |

| ROPs | 8 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 8.800 GPixel/s | 10.91 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 35.20 GTexel/s | 43.62 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,126.4 GFLOPS | 1,046.3 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 2.253 TFLOPS (2:1) | — |

| TDP | 25 W | 160 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | — | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | IGP | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Motherboard Dependent | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | — |

| Length | — | 210 mm / 8.3 inches |

| Release Date | 2018-02-11 | 2011-09-23 |

| Launch MSRP | — | 199 USD |

| Predecessor | GCN 3.0 IGP | GeForce 200 |

| Successor | Vega II IGP | GeForce 500 |