NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE vs NVIDIA Quadro K620M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database includes one direct benchmark comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE and the NVIDIA Quadro K620M: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the GTX 460 SE records a score of 6389, while the Quadro K620M scores 5957. The delta between the two is 7.3 percent, with the GTX 460 SE taking the single win in this head-to-head matchup.

This 7.3 percent advantage places the GTX 460 SE ahead of the Quadro K620M in raw compute performance as measured by OpenCL. For context, the GTX 460 SE sits at the 37th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Quadro K620M ranks at the 34th percentile. The gap is modest but consistent with the score delta.

The GTX 460 SE’s nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M, which matches its 6389 average score exactly (0 percent delta), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 72 GB Blackwell, which scores 6407, putting the GTX 460 SE 0.3 percent behind that part. On the other side, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 scores 6330, placing the GTX 460 SE 0.9 percent ahead, and the AMD Radeon R7 M350 scores 6327, placing it 1 percent ahead.

The Quadro K620M’s nearest rivals show a similar clustering. The AMD Radeon HD 8730M scores 5955, essentially identical to the K620M’s 5957 (0 percent delta). The AMD Radeon HD 8750M scores 5970, putting the K620M 0.2 percent behind. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 scores 5982, a 0.4 percent gap, and the Intel UHD Graphics 730 scores 5929, placing the K620M 0.5 percent ahead.

The benchmark data indicates that in a direct comparison, the GTX 460 SE is the stronger part in OpenCL workloads. However, the 7.3 percent margin is not a wide chasm; it represents a meaningful but not overwhelming performance gap. The percentile rankings reinforce this, with both parts sitting in the lower-middle range of the database, separated by only three percentile points.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded benchmark results, the GTX 460 SE wins the only head-to-head test available, the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark. Its 6389 score versus 5957 for the Quadro K620M gives it a clear, if modest, edge in compute-oriented tasks that rely on OpenCL execution.

The GTX 460 SE also holds advantages in several hardware specifications that influence performance in specific workloads. Its memory subsystem is notably wider: a 256-bit bus versus the Quadro K620M’s 64-bit bus, and its bandwidth of 108.8 GB/s dwarfs the K620M’s 16.02 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-bandwidth sensitive, such as large data transfers or texture-heavy scenes, the GTX 460 SE should maintain or extend its lead beyond the 7.3 percent OpenCL delta.

The GTX 460 SE also has a higher texture rate (31.20 GTexel/s versus 17.98 GTexel/s) and more TMUs (48 versus 16). This suggests a stronger performance profile in texture-mapping operations, which are common in gaming and certain graphics rendering tasks.

The Quadro K620M, by contrast, counters with a higher FP32 throughput: 863.2 GFLOPS versus 748.8 GFLOPS for the GTX 460 SE. This is a 15.3 percent advantage in raw floating-point compute per clock, which could matter in compute-heavy applications that are not memory-bound. The K620M also has more shading units (384 versus 288), which contributes to that FP32 lead.

The K620M’s pixel rate is also slightly higher: 8.992 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s for the GTX 460 SE. For fill-rate-limited scenarios, such as simple 2D rendering or certain post-processing effects, the K620M could close or reverse the gap seen in the OpenCL test.

In practical terms, the GTX 460 SE is better suited for tasks that demand high memory bandwidth and texture throughput. The Quadro K620M, with its higher compute density and lower power envelope, is better matched to constrained environments where raw FP32 performance per watt matters more than memory bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architectures and manufacturing nodes. The GTX 460 SE uses the GF104 chip based on the Fermi architecture, built on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The Quadro K620M uses the GM108S chip based on the Maxwell architecture, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 28 nm process.

The transistor counts reflect the node difference: the GTX 460 SE packs 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, for a transistor density of 5.9 million per square millimeter. The Quadro K620M has 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, yielding a density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The Maxwell chip is far more dense, more than doubling the transistor density of the Fermi part.

Memory configurations differ substantially. The GTX 460 SE uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, producing 108.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro K620M uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, for just 16.02 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock also differs: the GTX 460 SE runs at 850 MHz (3.4 Gbps effective), while the K620M runs at 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective).

The core configurations are also distinct. The GTX 460 SE has 288 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro K620M has 384 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The GTX 460 SE’s pixel rate is 7.800 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 31.20 GTexel/s. The K620M achieves 8.992 GPixel/s and 17.98 GTexel/s respectively.

FP32 performance favors the K620M: 863.2 GFLOPS versus 748.8 GFLOPS for the GTX 460 SE. Neither GPU has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores.

Power and physical characteristics differ as well. The GTX 460 SE has a TDP of 150 W, requires dual-slot cooling and two 6-pin power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 450 W. The Quadro K620M has a TDP of 30 W, uses an MXM module form factor, and requires no power connectors. The GTX 460 SE is 210 mm (8.3 inches) long and uses a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface. The K620M uses an MXM-A (3.0) interface and is described as portable-device dependent.

API support is similar: both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The K620M additionally supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 460 SE lists no Vulkan support. Display outputs also differ: the GTX 460 SE has 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a, while the K620M’s outputs are portable-device dependent.

The GTX 460 SE was released in November 2010, with a launch MSRP of 160 USD. The Quadro K620M was released in February 2015. Both are end-of-life products.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE is the faster part in the one direct benchmark available, winning the Geekbench OpenCL test by 7.3 percent. Its higher memory bandwidth (108.8 GB/s versus 16.02 GB/s) and larger texture throughput (31.20 GTexel/s versus 17.98 GTexel/s) make it the better choice for workloads that stress memory and texture operations.

However, the Quadro K620M is not without merit. It delivers higher FP32 compute (863.2 GFLOPS versus 748.8 GFLOPS) and a higher pixel rate (8.992 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s), all within a 30 W TDP compared to the GTX 460 SE’s 150 W. For compute-bound tasks that fit within a small power budget, the K620M could be the more sensible pick.

The GTX 460 SE’s 37th percentile ranking versus the K620M’s 34th percentile reinforces the GTX 460 SE’s overall edge in the database. But the margin is narrow, and the architectural differences suggest each part has a distinct niche.

Users who need maximum memory bandwidth and texture performance, and who can accommodate a dual-slot, 150 W card with external power connectors, should select the GTX 460 SE. Users who prioritize compute density, lower power consumption, and a compact MXM form factor, and who can accept lower memory bandwidth, should select the Quadro K620M.

The data does not support a blanket recommendation for either part. The choice depends entirely on the workload and the physical constraints of the system.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE wins, scoring 6389 versus the Quadro K620M’s 5957, a 7.3 percent delta.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each GPU?

A: The GTX 460 SE has 108.8 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Quadro K620M has 16.02 GB/s.

Q: How do the FP32 performance figures compare?

A: The Quadro K620M has higher FP32 compute at 863.2 GFLOPS, while the GTX 460 SE delivers 748.8 GFLOPS.

Q: What are the TDP values for these GPUs?

A: The GTX 460 SE has a TDP of 150 W, while the Quadro K620M has a TDP of 30 W.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Quadro K620M has 384 shading units, while the GTX 460 SE has 288.

Q: What are the process nodes for each GPU?

A: The GTX 460 SE is built on a 40 nm process, while the Quadro K620M uses a 28 nm process.