Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The GeForce GTX 460 SE and the Iris Pro Graphics P6300 are very different classes of hardware, and the benchmark data reflects that. In the only recorded head-to-head test, Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 460 SE scores 6389 points against 5712 for the Intel part. That is an 11.9% advantage for the NVIDIA card, a clear and decisive margin in a compute-oriented workload.

Looking at the broader database context, the GTX 460 SE sits at the 37th percentile of all GPUs, while the Iris Pro is at the 33rd. The GTX 460 SE's nearest rival is the GeForce GTX 580M, which scores identically at 6389, a 0% delta. The RTX PRO 5000 72 GB Blackwell is only 0.3% ahead, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 trails by 0.9%. This means the GTX 460 SE is effectively at parity with a high-end mobile part from a later generation, which is a strong result for a desktop card from 2010.

The Iris Pro P6300, meanwhile, is matched against the GeForce GTX 670MX, which scores 5721, a 0.1% lead over Intel. The GTX 550 Ti is 0.3% ahead, and the Radeon HD 8790M is 0.4% behind. The Quadro M500M trails by 1.9%. The Intel integrated solution is competitive with entry-level discrete mobile GPUs, but it does not challenge the GTX 460 SE's standing.

The 11.9% delta between the two cards is consistent across the entire benchmark suite, since only one test is recorded. There are no reversals or close calls. The GTX 460 SE wins the only comparison outright.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 460 SE wins the compute benchmark, and that is the only measurable category. Its 6389 score puts it comfortably ahead of the Iris Pro's 5712. In raw throughput, the NVIDIA card delivers 748.8 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel part manages 614.4 GFLOPS. That difference in raw math capability directly explains the OpenCL result.

The GTX 460 SE also has a massive memory advantage. It uses 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 108.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Iris Pro uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." In practice, that means the Intel part is at the mercy of the system's memory configuration, which typically cannot match a dedicated GDDR5 implementation. The GTX 460 SE's 7.800 GPixel/s pixel rate and 31.20 GTexel/s texture rate are both higher than the Intel's 4.800 GPixel/s and 38.40 GTexel/s respectively. Note the texture rate is actually higher on Intel, but pixel throughput is much lower, which matters for many games.

The Iris Pro P6300 does have one clear advantage: power consumption. Its TDP is 15 W, versus 150 W for the GTX 460 SE. That is a 10x difference. For a system where power draw and heat output are critical, the Intel part is far more efficient. It is an IGP, meaning it is built into the processor and requires no separate card, no power connectors, and no dual-slot cooler. The GTX 460 SE needs 2x 6-pin connectors and a 450 W suggested PSU.

The Iris Pro also supports Vulkan 1.0, whereas the GTX 460 SE has no Vulkan support listed. It also supports DirectX 12 (11_1) versus the GTX 460 SE's DirectX 12 (11_0). For modern API compatibility, Intel has an edge.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 460 SE is built on NVIDIA's Fermi architecture, using the GF104 chip. It is manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC, with 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die. That is a transistor density of 5.9M per mm². The card has 288 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. It uses GDDR5 memory with a 256-bit bus.

The Iris Pro P6300 is based on Intel's Generation 8.0 architecture, using the Broadwell GT3e chip. It is built on a 14 nm process at Intel, which is a much more advanced node. The die size and transistor count are not listed in the database, but the process advantage is clear: 14 nm versus 40 nm. The Intel part has 384 shading units, 48 TMUs, but only 6 ROPs. That low ROP count is a major bottleneck for pixel-heavy workloads, which explains the lower pixel rate despite having more shaders.

The memory architecture is fundamentally different. The GTX 460 SE has dedicated VRAM with fixed bandwidth. The Iris Pro uses system shared memory, with bandwidth dependent on the platform. This is a structural disadvantage for the Intel part in any memory-intensive task.

The GTX 460 SE supports OpenGL 4.6, while the Iris Pro supports OpenGL 4.4. The NVIDIA card has no Vulkan support, while Intel has Vulkan 1.0. DirectX support is close: 11_0 for NVIDIA versus 11_1 for Intel. The display outputs also differ: the GTX 460 SE has 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a, while the Iris Pro's outputs are motherboard dependent.

The GTX 460 SE is a dual-slot card with a 210 mm length (8.3 inches). The Iris Pro is an IGP with no physical slot width, no power connectors, and no separate cooler. It is entirely integrated into the motherboard.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for different use cases. If you need raw compute performance, the GTX 460 SE is the winner. It is 11.9% faster in OpenCL, has higher FP32 throughput (748.8 GFLOPS versus 614.4 GFLOPS), higher pixel rate (7.800 versus 4.800 GPixel/s), and vastly superior memory bandwidth (108.8 GB/s versus system dependent). It also has a 256-bit memory bus and 32 ROPs, which will handle traditional gaming workloads better than the Intel part's 6 ROPs.

If power efficiency is the priority, the Iris Pro P6300 is the only logical choice. Its 15 W TDP is a fraction of the GTX 460 SE's 150 W. It requires no additional power connectors, no slot space, and no dedicated cooler. For a compact, low-power system, it is far more practical.

The GTX 460 SE is an end-of-life product from 2010, with a launch MSRP of 160 USD. The Iris Pro is also end-of-life, released in 2014. Both are obsolete by modern standards, but the data shows the NVIDIA card still holds a performance edge in compute tasks. The Intel part is better suited for basic graphics, media playback, and power-constrained environments.

The database indicates the GTX 460 SE wins 1 benchmark and the Iris Pro wins 0. That is the definitive score. If you are building a system from old parts and need any kind of gaming or GPU compute, the GTX 460 SE is the stronger option, provided you have the power supply and slot space. If you are working with a low-power platform where an IGP is mandatory, the Iris Pro is adequate for light tasks but will not compete with the older discrete card.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE scores 6389, while the Intel Iris Pro P6300 scores 5712. The GTX 460 SE is 11.9% faster.

Q: How much power does each GPU consume?

A: The GTX 460 SE has a TDP of 150 W, while the Iris Pro P6300 has a TDP of 15 W. That is a 10x difference in favor of Intel.

Q: Does the Intel Iris Pro support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the Iris Pro P6300 supports Vulkan 1.0. The NVIDIA GTX 460 SE has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The GTX 460 SE has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, with 108.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Iris Pro uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Iris Pro P6300 has 384 shading units, while the NVIDIA GTX 460 SE has 288. However, the GTX 460 SE has 32 ROPs versus only 6 on the Intel part.

Q: What is the pixel rate difference?

A: The GTX 460 SE achieves 7.800 GPixel/s, while the Iris Pro P6300 achieves 4.800 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA card delivers 62.5% higher pixel throughput.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE | Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 |

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

| Architecture | Fermi | Generation 8.0 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Shading Units | 288 | 384 |

| ROPs | 32 | 6 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.800 GPixel/s | 4.800 GPixel/s |

| FP32 | 748.8 GFLOPS | 614.4 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 150 W | 15 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

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

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 108.8 GB/s | System Dependent |

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |

| Vulkan | None | 1.0 |

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

| Release Date | 2010-11-14 | 2014-09-04 |

| Launch MSRP | 160 USD | None |