NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE vs NVIDIA GeForce MX230 Comparison

The GeForce GTX 460 SE and the GeForce MX230 are two very different solutions from NVIDIA, separated by nearly a decade of architecture evolution. The data shows a clear split: the older GTX 460 SE holds a narrow lead in raw compute benchmarks, while the newer MX230 brings modern features and dramatically lower power demands. The verdict is straightforward: choose the GTX 460 SE for pure compute performance in a desktop system, and choose the MX230 for any scenario requiring efficient, integrated graphics in a portable device. The GTX 460 SE wins the only head-to-head benchmark, but the MX230 counters with superior API support, a more modern process node, and a power draw that is a fraction of its rival's.

The Verdict

The benchmark results indicate that the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE is the performance pick, but only by a slim margin. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 460 SE scores 6389, which is 11.3% ahead of the MX230's score of 5739. This places the GTX 460 SE in the 37th percentile of all GPUs, while the MX230 sits in the 35th percentile. The GTX 460 SE's closest rival is the GeForce GTX 580M, with an identical average score, showing it is competitive with higher-tier mobile parts from its own era. However, this performance comes at a significant cost: a 150 W TDP, a dual-slot cooler, and a requirement for two 6-pin power connectors.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX230, despite losing the head-to-head, is the more compelling choice for modern mobile use cases. Its 10 W TDP, integrated form factor (IGP), and lack of power connectors make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where the GTX 460 SE's desktop-oriented design is physically impossible. While its OpenCL score is lower, it offers a Vulkan API rating of 1.4, which the GTX 460 SE lacks entirely, and supports DirectX 12 (12_1) compared to the older card's DirectX 12 (11_0). For users who need a discrete-level GPU in a portable package, the MX230 is the only viable option from this pair. The GTX 460 SE is for legacy desktop builds where power consumption and physical size are not primary concerns.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial, reflecting their different release eras. The GTX 460 SE is built on the Fermi architecture using a 40 nm process at TSMC, with a chip size of 332 mm² and a transistor density of 5.9M per mm². In contrast, the MX230 uses the Pascal architecture manufactured on a 14 nm process at Samsung, which allows for a vastly smaller 74 mm² die and a much higher density of 24.3M per mm². This process advantage is the primary reason the MX230 can achieve its low power draw while still offering competitive compute performance.

The memory configurations also diverge sharply. The GTX 460 SE uses a 256-bit memory bus with 1024 MB of GDDR5, resulting in a bandwidth of 108.8 GB/s. The MX230 is limited to a 64-bit bus, halving the memory interface width, which contributes to its much lower bandwidth of 48.06 GB/s, despite having double the capacity at 2 GB. The GTX 460 SE compensates for its older architecture with a wider memory pipeline, while the MX230 relies on architectural efficiency. The shading units tell a similar story: the GTX 460 SE has 288 shading units and 48 TMUs, while the MX230 has 256 shading units and only 16 TMUs. The GTX 460 SE also has double the ROPs (32 vs 16), which explains its higher pixel rate of 7.800 GPixel/s compared to the MX230's 24.50 GPixel/s, though the latter benefits from higher clocks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

In the only direct benchmark comparison available, the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 460 SE decisively outperforms the MX230. The GTX 460 SE scores 6389, while the MX230 scores 5739, a difference of 650 points that translates to an 11.3% advantage for the older card. This is a significant win, showing that the Fermi architecture's wider memory bus and higher raw compute resources still hold an edge in this workload. Notably, the MX230 has no OpenCL rival in the data that it beats; its average benchmark score of 6077 is pulled down by this loss, but its Vulkan score of 6414 shows it excels in more modern API environments.

The NVIDIA RTX A400, a close rival to the MX230 with an average score of 6078, is effectively tied with the MX230's average, showing that the MX230 is not far behind modern entry-level workstation parts. The GTX 460 SE's nearest rival, the GTX 580M, matches it exactly at 6389, indicating that the desktop card's performance is comparable to high-end mobile GPUs of its generation. The data also shows the GTX 460 SE is only 0.3% behind the much newer RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell in this specific test, though that result is likely due to driver or workload characteristics rather than genuine parity.

The single head-to-head metric reveals that the GTX 460 SE wins the only compute test, but the MX230 counters with a Vulkan score of 6414, which is higher than the GTX 460 SE's OpenCL score. This suggests the MX230 is better optimized for modern graphics APIs, even if its raw OpenCL throughput is lower. The GTX 460 SE's win is clear but narrow, and it does not account for power efficiency or feature support.

Specification Differences

The specification table highlights where these two GPUs diverge most significantly, beyond their performance metrics.

• Process Node: The GTX 460 SE uses a 40 nm process, while the MX230 uses a 14 nm process.
• Die Size: The GTX 460 SE has a 332 mm² die, versus 74 mm² for the MX230.
• Transistor Density: The MX230 packs 24.3M transistors per mm², compared to 5.9M per mm² for the GTX 460 SE.
• Base Clock: The MX230 has a base clock of 1519 MHz; the GTX 460 SE has no listed base clock.
• Boost Clock: The MX230 boosts to 1531 MHz; the GTX 460 SE has no listed boost clock.
• Memory Size: The MX230 has 2 GB, double the GTX 460 SE's 1024 MB.
• Memory Bus: The GTX 460 SE has a 256-bit bus; the MX230 uses a 64-bit bus.
• Memory Bandwidth: The GTX 460 SE offers 108.8 GB/s, more than double the MX230's 48.06 GB/s.
• Shading Units: The GTX 460 SE has 288, while the MX230 has 256.
• TMUs: The GTX 460 SE has 48, triple the MX230's 16.
• ROPs: The GTX 460 SE has 32, double the MX230's 16.
• FP32 Performance: The MX230 is slightly ahead at 783.9 GFLOPS, versus 748.8 GFLOPS for the GTX 460 SE.
• TDP: The GTX 460 SE consumes 150 W, while the MX230 consumes only 10 W.
• Slot Width: The GTX 460 SE is dual-slot; the MX230 is integrated (IGP).
• Power Connectors: The GTX 460 SE requires 2x 6-pin; the MX230 requires none.
• Suggested PSU: The GTX 460 SE needs a 450 W PSU; the MX230 has no such requirement.
• Bus Interface: The GTX 460 SE uses PCIe 2.0 x16; the MX230 uses PCIe 3.0 x4.
• DirectX Support: The MX230 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 460 SE supports only DirectX 12 (11_0).
• Vulkan Support: The MX230 supports Vulkan 1.4; the GTX 460 SE has no Vulkan support listed.
• Release Date: The GTX 460 SE launched in November 2010, while the MX230 launched in February 2019.
• Launch MSRP: The GTX 460 SE had a launch MSRP of 160 USD; the MX230 has no listed MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in compute performance?

A: The GTX 460 SE is faster, scoring 6389 in Geekbench OpenCL compared to the MX230's 5739, an 11.3% advantage.

Q: Can the MX230 be used in a desktop tower?

A: No, the MX230 is an integrated GPU (IGP) with no slot width, designed for portable devices, while the GTX 460 SE is a dual-slot desktop card.

Q: Why does the MX230 have a higher FP32 rating despite losing the benchmark?

A: The MX230 has a slightly higher FP32 rating of 783.9 GFLOPS versus 748.8 GFLOPS, but the GTX 460 SE's wider memory bus and higher texture and pixel rates contribute to its better real-world OpenCL score.

Q: Does the GTX 460 SE support modern graphics APIs?

A: The GTX 460 SE supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but it has no Vulkan support, unlike the MX230 which supports Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The GTX 460 SE has a TDP of 150 W and requires a 450 W PSU, while the MX230 has a TDP of just 10 W and requires no external power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 460 SE has a bandwidth of 108.8 GB/s, which is more than double the MX230's 48.06 GB/s, due to its 256-bit bus versus 64-bit.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 460 SE is the clear winner in raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth. Its 108.8 GB/s bandwidth is a decisive advantage in memory-intensive workloads, and its 11.3% lead in the OpenCL benchmark demonstrates superior raw processing power. The data shows it is well-suited for desktop applications where performance is the sole criterion, such as legacy gaming or compute tasks that do not rely on modern API features. Its 32 ROPs and 48 TMUs also give it an edge in fill-rate dependent scenarios, making it a better choice for older DirectX 11 titles.

The MX230 wins on efficiency and modern feature support. Its 10 W TDP makes it ideal for battery-powered devices, where the GTX 460 SE's 150 W draw is not feasible. The MX230's support for Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1) means it can run newer software that the GTX 460 SE cannot, and its higher base and boost clocks (1519 MHz and 1531 MHz) suggest better performance in clock-bound tasks. The MX230 is the only choice for portable computing, and its 2 GB memory capacity is more useful for modern applications that require larger frame buffers. For any use case involving a laptop, ultrabook, or embedded system, the MX230's integrated nature and low power draw are decisive advantages.