NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE and the NVIDIA RTX A400 are separated by nearly 14 years of GPU architecture, yet their average benchmark scores place them in a similar performance tier. The GTX 460 SE, a Fermi-era part from 2010, manages an average Geekbench OpenCL score of 6389, while the Ampere-based RTX A400 from 2024 scores 22844 in that same test but falls to an average of 6078 across all its benchmarks. This creates an unusual dynamic where the older card wins the single available head-to-head OpenCL comparison on average score, but the newer card delivers dramatically higher peak performance in that same workload.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher single benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A400 achieves 22844 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 257% higher than the GTX 460 SE's 6389 in the same test. The RTX A400 also scores 22237 in Geekbench Vulkan and 5983 in Passmark G3D.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The GTX 460 SE has an average benchmark score of 6389, while the RTX A400 averages 6078 across nine different tests. The GTX 460 SE sits at the 37th percentile of all GPUs, and the RTX A400 sits at the 35th percentile.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each card?

A: The GTX 460 SE's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M with an identical score of 6389, followed by the RTX PRO 5000 72 GB Blackwell at 6407 (0.3% higher). The RTX A400's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 at 6077 (0% difference), with the Quadro P2000 at 6049 (0.5% lower).

Q: Do both cards support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, but at different feature levels. The GTX 460 SE supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the RTX A400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6, but only the RTX A400 lists Vulkan support, at version 1.4.

Q: What memory configurations do they use?

A: The GTX 460 SE has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 108.8 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, despite having a narrower bus.

Q: Which card is currently in production?

A: The RTX A400 is marked as Active production status, while the GTX 460 SE is End-of-life. The GTX 460 SE was released in 2010 with a launch MSRP of 160 USD, and the RTX A400 was released in 2024.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural eras. The GTX 460 SE uses the GF104 chip built on Fermi architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 40 nm process. It packs 1,950 million transistors into a 332 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.9M per mm². The RTX A400 uses the GA107 chip based on Ampere architecture, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. It contains 8,700 million transistors on a smaller 200 mm² die, achieving a much higher density of 43.5M per mm².

The shader configurations differ significantly. The GTX 460 SE has 288 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The RTX A400 has 768 shading units, but only 24 TMUs and 16 ROPs. The RTX A400 also adds dedicated hardware that the Fermi GPU lacks entirely: 6 RT cores and 24 tensor cores. These enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based tensor operations, neither of which exist on the GTX 460 SE.

Memory technology represents another generational leap. The GTX 460 SE uses GDDR5 with a 256-bit memory bus, while the RTX A400 uses GDDR6 with a 64-bit bus. Despite having one-quarter the bus width, the RTX A400's faster effective memory speed of 12 Gbps versus 3.4 Gbps allows it to achieve 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, only about 12% less than the GTX 460 SE's 108.8 GB/s. The RTX A400 also has four times the memory capacity at 4 GB versus 1 GB.

Process technology and transistor density tell the story of efficiency. The RTX A400's 8 nm node allows for 4.5 times more transistors per square millimeter compared to the 40 nm GTX 460 SE. This enables the Ampere card to deliver far higher compute throughput while consuming only 50 W TDP versus 150 W for the Fermi card. The RTX A400 also supports newer PCIe 4.0 x8, while the GTX 460 SE uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are stark. The RTX A400 scores 22844, while the GTX 460 SE scores 6389. This represents a 72% delta, meaning the RTX A400 outperforms the GTX 460 SE by a factor of 3.57 in raw OpenCL compute. That gap is enormous and reflects the massive architectural advantages of Ampere over Fermi.

However, the average benchmark scores tell a more nuanced story. The GTX 460 SE's average of 6389 comes from its single OpenCL result, while the RTX A400's average of 6078 is calculated across nine tests, many of which are much lower than its OpenCL peak. The RTX A400 scores 5983 in Passmark G3D, 2557 in Passmark GPU Compute, and only 87 in Passmark DirectX 9. These lower scores drag its average down below the GTX 460 SE's single result.

The RTX A400's performance is highly workload-dependent. Its OpenCL and Vulkan scores of 22844 and 22237, respectively, are excellent, but its DirectX scores are weak: 32 in DirectX 10, 37 in DirectX 11, and 27 in DirectX 12. The Passmark G2D score of 899 suggests modest 2D desktop performance. The GTX 460 SE, by contrast, has no other benchmark results in the data, so its average reflects only its OpenCL capability.

Looking at the percentile rankings, both cards sit near the bottom of the overall GPU distribution. The GTX 460 SE ranks at the 37th percentile, and the RTX A400 at the 35th. Their nearest rivals confirm this middle-low tier positioning. The GTX 460 SE trades blows with the GTX 580M (0% delta), RTX PRO 5000 72 GB Blackwell (0.3% higher), and Radeon Pro WX 4100 (0.9% higher). The RTX A400 matches the GeForce MX230 exactly, sits 0.5% above the Quadro P2000, and trails the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 by 0.6%.

Specification Differences

The display outputs differ completely. The GTX 460 SE offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a, while the RTX A400 provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. The RTX A400 is also a single-slot card measuring 163 mm in length and 69 mm in height, whereas the GTX 460 SE is a dual-slot card at 210 mm long. The RTX A400 requires no power connectors and suggests a 250 W PSU, while the GTX 460 SE needs 2x 6-pin connectors and a 450 W PSU.

Clock speeds show the RTX A400's advantage. It has a base clock of 1417 MHz and a boost clock of 1762 MHz, while the GTX 460 SE has no listed base or boost clocks, only a memory clock of 850 MHz (3.4 Gbps effective). The RTX A400's memory runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Pixel and texture rates favor the RTX A400: 28.19 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s, and 42.29 GTexel/s versus 31.20 GTexel/s.

Compute throughput is where the RTX A400 dominates. It delivers 2.706 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, versus 748.8 GFLOPS for the GTX 460 SE — a 3.6x advantage. The RTX A400 also offers FP16 performance at 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the GTX 460 SE has no listed FP16 capability. The RTX A400's API support extends to DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 460 SE tops out at DirectX 12 (11_0) with no Vulkan listing.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A400 wins decisively in raw compute and modern API workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 22844 is 3.57 times higher than the GTX 460 SE's 6389, and it adds Vulkan support that the Fermi card lacks entirely. The RTX A400 also offers hardware ray tracing through 6 RT cores and AI acceleration via 24 tensor cores, features that enable workflows the GTX 460 SE cannot handle. Its lower power draw of 50 W, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors make it far easier to install in compact or power-constrained systems.

The GTX 460 SE wins only on average benchmark score and memory bandwidth. Its 6389 average beats the RTX A400's 6078, and its 108.8 GB/s bandwidth exceeds the RTX A400's 96.00 GB/s despite the older GDDR5 technology. The GTX 460 SE also has a wider 256-bit memory bus, which can be advantageous in certain memory-latency-sensitive tasks. Its 32 ROPs double the RTX A400's 16, potentially benefiting fill-rate-bound scenarios, though the RTX A400's higher pixel rate of 28.19 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s suggests otherwise.

For legacy application compatibility, the GTX 460 SE's older DVI outputs may be useful for connecting to vintage displays without adapters. Its 2010 release date means it natively supports the display standards of that era. However, the RTX A400's 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support modern high-resolution monitors and multi-display setups that the GTX 460 SE cannot drive.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the RTX A400 for nearly every modern use case. Its OpenCL score of 22844 versus 6389 represents a 72% performance advantage in the only directly comparable benchmark. The RTX A400 additionally offers Vulkan support, ray tracing cores, tensor cores, 4 GB of memory versus 1 GB, and a 50 W power draw that makes it suitable for systems where the GTX 460 SE's 150 W requirement would be prohibitive. Its 2.706 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is 3.6 times higher than the GTX 460 SE's 748.8 GFLOPS.

The GTX 460 SE is only defensible if you need its higher average score of 6389 versus 6078, its wider 256-bit memory bus, or its specific DVI output configuration. Its 108.8 GB/s bandwidth is also slightly higher than the RTX A400's 96.00 GB/s, though the newer card's GDDR6 memory and 4 GB capacity make that difference largely irrelevant for modern workloads. The GTX 460 SE is end-of-life, while the RTX A400 remains active production.

Choose the RTX A400 for any new build or upgrade where you need modern API support, compute performance, or low power consumption. Choose the GTX 460 SE only for legacy system restoration or specific compatibility needs with early-2010s display hardware, accepting that its 37th percentile ranking and lack of Vulkan support limit its utility in current software environments. The RTX A400's 35th percentile ranking is similar, but its feature set makes it the more practical long-term investment.