NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and it delivers a clear verdict in favor of the newer mobile chip. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M scores 7,176 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE trails with 6,389 points. That is an 11% deficit for the desktop card, a meaningful gap in raw compute throughput.

The GTX 765M also posts additional scores in other API tests, though the GTX 460 SE has no corresponding entries. In Geekbench Vulkan, the mobile chip reaches 6,714 points, and in Geekbench Metal it scores 2,612 points. These results cannot be compared directly to the older card, but they show that the Kepler part is capable across multiple modern APIs, a trait the Fermi card cannot match because the database lists no Vulkan or Metal results for it.

Looking at the broader database context, the GTX 765M holds a 32nd percentile ranking among all GPUs, while the GTX 460 SE sits slightly higher at the 37th percentile. This is curious: the GTX 460 SE has the better percentile, yet it loses the head-to-head OpenCL contest. The explanation lies in the average benchmark score. The GTX 460 SE has only one recorded benchmark, so its average equals its OpenCL score of 6,389. The GTX 765M has three benchmarks, and its average drops to 5,501 because the Metal score of 2,612 pulls the mean down. The percentile ranking, therefore, reflects different data sets, not necessarily overall performance superiority.

The nearest rivals for each card reinforce this picture. The GTX 460 SE sits exactly level with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M, both at 6,389 points. It is 0.3% behind the NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 72 GB Blackwell, which scores 6,407, and it leads the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 by 0.9% and the AMD Radeon R7 M350 by 1.0%. The GTX 765M, by contrast, trades places with a different set of competitors. It is 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce MX130, 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M440, 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro M4000, and 0.7% behind the AMD FirePro M4000.

What the data implies is that the GTX 460 SE, despite being older and built on a larger process node, holds its own in OpenCL compute against a much newer mobile chip. Yet the GTX 765M pulls ahead when the workload scales across its larger shader array. The 11% delta is not enormous, but it is consistent with the architectural shift that occurred between Fermi and Kepler.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M wins with a score of 7,176 points, beating the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE, which scores 6,389 points. The delta is 11% in favor of the mobile chip.

Q: Does the GTX 460 SE have any benchmark where it beats the GTX 765M?

A: No. The database contains only one head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, and the GTX 765M wins it. The GTX 460 SE has zero wins in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: Why does the GTX 460 SE have a higher percentile ranking if it loses the head-to-head test?

A: The GTX 460 SE ranks at the 37th percentile among all GPUs, while the GTX 765M ranks at the 32nd percentile. This occurs because the GTX 460 SE has a single benchmark score of 6,389, which is also its average, whereas the GTX 765M has three scores, including a lower Metal result of 2,612, which brings its average down to 5,501.

Q: What additional benchmark scores does the GTX 765M have?

A: Besides the OpenCL score of 7,176, the GTX 765M records a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6,714 and a Geekbench Metal score of 2,612.

Q: How does each card compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 460 SE is exactly tied with the GTX 580M at 6,389 points, is 0.3% behind the RTX PRO 5000 72 GB Blackwell, and leads the Radeon Pro WX 4100 by 0.9% and the Radeon R7 M350 by 1.0%. The GTX 765M is 0.1% behind the MX130, 0.3% ahead of the Radeon R7 M440, 0.6% ahead of the Quadro M4000, and 0.7% behind the FirePro M4000.

Q: Are both graphics cards still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life products in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from entirely different architectural generations. The GTX 460 SE uses the GF104 chip, built on the Fermi architecture, and was manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The GTX 765M uses the GK106 chip, built on the Kepler architecture, and uses a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. This process shrink is substantial, and the data reflects it in transistor density. The GTX 460 SE packs 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, yielding a density of 5.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The GTX 765M crams 2,540 million transistors into a smaller 221 mm² die, resulting in 11.5 million transistors per square millimeter, nearly double the density.

The shader architecture diverges sharply. The GTX 460 SE has 288 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 765M has 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, but only 16 ROPs. The Kepler design leans heavily on shader throughput, while the Fermi card retains a wider ROP partition. This explains why the GTX 765M posts a much higher pixel rate of 13.81 GPixel/s despite having half the ROP count: the ROPs are clocked higher and the architecture is more efficient. The texture rate also favors the mobile chip, 55.23 GTexel/s versus 31.20 GTexel/s for the GTX 460 SE.

Compute throughput tells the same story. The GTX 765M delivers 1,325.6 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the GTX 460 SE manages 748.8 GFLOPS. Neither card has dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores, and neither lists FP16 performance. The API support also differs: both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the GTX 765M additionally supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the GTX 460 SE has no Vulkan support listed.

The interface situation is telling. The GTX 460 SE uses PCIe 2.0 x16, a standard desktop slot. The GTX 765M uses MXM-B (3.0), a mobile module form factor. Display outputs reflect this: the desktop card provides 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a, while the mobile card's outputs are labeled "Portable Device Dependent."

Specification Differences

The memory subsystems are very different. The GTX 460 SE has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, producing 108.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 765M doubles the capacity to 2 GB but uses a 128-bit bus, cutting bandwidth to 64.13 GB/s. The memory clocks also differ: the GTX 460 SE runs at 850 MHz, or 3.4 Gbps effective, while the GTX 765M runs at 1002 MHz, or 4 Gbps effective. The higher clock rate cannot compensate for the narrower bus, so the desktop card has significantly more memory bandwidth.

Clock speeds reveal a different tradeoff. The GTX 460 SE has no listed base or boost clock, only a memory clock. The GTX 765M has a base clock of 797 MHz and a boost of 863 MHz. The power draw is starkly different: the GTX 460 SE consumes 150 W, while the GTX 765M draws only 75 W. This halving of power consumption is a major advantage for the mobile chip. The GTX 460 SE requires a dual-slot cooler, two 6-pin power connectors, and a suggested 450 W power supply. The GTX 765M is an MXM module with no power connectors listed and no suggested PSU.

The release dates are separated by roughly two and a half years. The GTX 460 SE launched on November 14, 2010, as part of the GeForce 400 generation, with a launch MSRP of 160 USD. The GTX 765M launched on May 29, 2013, in the GeForce 700M generation, and has no launch MSRP listed. The GTX 460 SE succeeds the GeForce 200 series and precedes the GeForce 500 series. The GTX 765M succeeds the GeForce 600M and precedes the GeForce 800M.

Physical dimensions differ as well. The GTX 460 SE is 210 mm long, or 8.3 inches. The GTX 765M has no listed dimensions, consistent with its MXM module form factor. The GTX 460 SE is dual-slot, while the GTX 765M is an MXM Module.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear division of labor. The GTX 765M wins the only direct comparison, beating the GTX 460 SE by 11% in OpenCL. It also offers Vulkan and Metal support, lower power draw at 75 W versus 150 W, double the memory capacity at 2 GB versus 1024 MB, and a much higher FP32 throughput of 1,325.6 GFLOPS versus 748.8 GFLOPS. For any workload that stresses compute shaders or modern API compatibility, the GTX 765M is the superior choice.

The GTX 460 SE, however, is not without its own strengths. It has more memory bandwidth at 108.8 GB/s, a wider 256-bit bus, and more ROPs at 32 versus 16. It also ranks higher in the overall percentile, at 37 versus 32, and its average benchmark score of 6,389 exceeds the GTX 765M's average of 5,501, though this is skewed by the mobile card's lower Metal score. The desktop card also has a longer physical presence at 210 mm, which may be relevant for users building in a full-sized desktop chassis with PCIe 2.0 x16 support.

The data does not support a universal winner. The GTX 765M is the better compute performer and the more power-efficient part, but the GTX 460 SE retains advantages in memory bandwidth and ROP throughput that could matter for certain bandwidth-sensitive tasks. The GTX 765M's 75 W TDP makes it viable for mobile platforms, while the GTX 460 SE's 150 W TDP and dual-slot cooler anchor it to a desktop tower.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 765M wins in raw compute performance. Its OpenCL score of 7,176 beats the GTX 460 SE's 6,389 by 11%. It also wins on shader count, with 768 shading units versus 288, and on texture rate, 55.23 GTexel/s versus 31.20 GTexel/s. The pixel rate also favors the mobile chip, 13.81 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s. For modern API workloads, the GTX 765M is the only one of the two with Vulkan support, listed as version 1.2.175. It also has the advantage in memory capacity, 2 GB versus 1024 MB, and in power efficiency, 75 W versus 150 W.

The GTX 460 SE wins in memory bandwidth, 108.8 GB/s versus 64.13 GB/s, and in bus width, 256-bit versus 128-bit. It also has double the ROP count, 32 versus 16, which can benefit certain fill-rate-bound scenarios. The desktop card has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs, 37 versus 32, and its average benchmark score of 6,389 is higher than the GTX 765M's 5,501, although this is a comparison of different benchmark sets. The GTX 460 SE also offers a launch MSRP of 160 USD, a fact that may interest historical buyers, though the card is now end-of-life.

The database records zero wins for the GTX 460 SE and one win for the GTX 765M in head-to-head tests. That single win, however, is only one data point. The GTX 765M's additional Vulkan and Metal scores show it is a more versatile part in the modern API landscape, while the GTX 460 SE's single OpenCL score leaves its broader capabilities unmeasured. For users prioritizing compute and efficiency, the GTX 765M is the data-backed choice. For users who need maximum memory bandwidth or ROP throughput in a desktop context, the GTX 460 SE has measurable advantages that the benchmark comparison does not fully capture.