NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX330 Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX330

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 and NVIDIA GeForce MX330 represent two very different eras of GPU design, and the benchmark data reflects that split. The GTX 460 v2, a desktop card from the Fermi era, posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 8,743, while the MX330, a mobile Pascal chip, scores 7,896 in the same test. That 10.7% delta in favor of the older desktop card is the single head-to-head data point available, and it sets the stage for a comparison that hinges on architecture, memory configuration, and intended use case rather than raw generational progress.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 460 v2 wins the only direct benchmark comparison available. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 8,743 against the MX330's 7,896, a 10.7% advantage. This is the sole head-to-head test in the data, so the GTX 460 v2 holds a clean 1–0 record in wins. The MX330 has no head-to-head victories in the dataset.

However, the MX330 wins in other measurable ways. It has a higher FP32 throughput at 1,224.2 GFLOPS versus 1,046.3 GFLOPS for the GTX 460 v2, meaning raw compute per clock is better on the newer chip. The MX330 also has a much higher pixel rate at 25.50 GPixel/s compared to 10.91 GPixel/s, suggesting fill-rate-heavy workloads could favor it despite the OpenCL deficit. The MX330's Vulkan support (version 1.4) versus the GTX 460 v2's lack of listed Vulkan support is another clear win for the newer card in API compatibility.

The GTX 460 v2, meanwhile, wins on memory bandwidth decisively: 96.19 GB/s versus 56.06 GB/s. It also has a wider memory bus at 192-bit versus 64-bit, and more TMUs (56 vs 24) and ROPs (24 vs 16). For workloads that are bandwidth-bound or texture-heavy, the GTX 460 v2's architecture gives it a structural edge.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 scores 8,743, which is 10.7% higher than the MX330's 7,896 in the same test.

Q: Does the MX330 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the MX330 lists Vulkan 1.4 support. The GTX 460 v2 has no Vulkan support listed in the data.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The GTX 460 v2 offers 96.19 GB/s of bandwidth, while the MX330 provides 56.06 GB/s. The GTX 460 v2 has 71.6% more bandwidth.

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute?

A: The MX330 delivers 1,224.2 GFLOPS compared to the GTX 460 v2's 1,046.3 GFLOPS, making the MX330 17% higher in raw FP32 throughput.

Q: What are the power requirements of each card?

A: The GTX 460 v2 has a TDP of 160 W and requires 2x 6-pin power connectors with a suggested 450 W PSU. The MX330 has a TDP of 10 W and uses no power connectors.

Q: How do the two compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 460 v2's score of 8,743 sits within 1.4% of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8,863) and 1.2% of the AMD Radeon R9 M265X (8,851). The MX330's 7,896 is within 1.2% of the Intel Arc A380 (8,558) and 0.3% of the AMD Radeon 880M (8,436).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is decisive. The GTX 460 v2 scores 8,743, while the MX330 scores 7,896. The delta is 10.7%, which is a meaningful gap in synthetic compute performance. This result is consistent with the GTX 460 v2's wider memory bus and higher bandwidth, which likely helps in OpenCL's memory-intensive workloads.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces this split. The GTX 460 v2's 8,743 score places it just 0.3% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8,746) and 0.7% above the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (8,686). The MX330's 7,896 score, by contrast, sits 0.4% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8,427) and 0.3% below the AMD Radeon 880M (8,436). In percentile terms, the GTX 460 v2 ranks at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, while the MX330 ranks at the 43rd percentile. These are nearly identical overall standings, yet the head-to-head result shows a consistent 10.7% advantage for the older desktop card.

The MX330 does have a second benchmark result in its own data: a Geekbench Vulkan score of 9,019. However, no corresponding Vulkan score exists for the GTX 460 v2, so this cannot be compared directly. It does indicate that the MX330 is functional in Vulkan workloads, which is more than can be said for the GTX 460 v2 based on the available data.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge sharply on nearly every specification. The GTX 460 v2 uses a 192-bit memory bus with 1,024 MB of GDDR5, while the MX330 uses a 64-bit bus with 2,048 MB of GDDR5. Memory bandwidth follows the bus width: 96.19 GB/s for the GTX 460 v2 versus 56.06 GB/s for the MX330. The GTX 460 v2 runs memory at 1,002 MHz (4 Gbps effective), while the MX330 runs at 1,752 MHz (7 Gbps effective) — the faster clock on the MX330 cannot compensate for its narrower bus.

Shading unit counts favor the MX330 (384 vs 336), but the GTX 460 v2 has more TMUs (56 vs 24) and ROPs (24 vs 16). Pixel rate is substantially higher on the MX330 at 25.50 GPixel/s versus 10.91 GPixel/s, while texture rate is higher on the GTX 460 v2 at 43.62 GTexel/s versus 38.26 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is higher on the MX330 at 1,224.2 GFLOPS versus 1,046.3 GFLOPS.

The GTX 460 v2 draws 160 W and requires 2x 6-pin power connectors with a suggested 450 W PSU. The MX330 draws just 10 W and uses no power connectors. The GTX 460 v2 is a dual-slot card measuring 210 mm (8.3 inches) in length, while the MX330 is an IGP with no listed dimensions. The GTX 460 v2 uses a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface; the MX330 uses PCIe 3.0 x4. Display outputs also differ: the GTX 460 v2 offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a, while the MX330's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent."

Architecture Differences

The GTX 460 v2 is built on the GF114 chip using NVIDIA's Fermi 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It contains 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.9M per mm². This is a large, power-hungry desktop chip from the GeForce 400 generation, released in September 2011.

The MX330 uses the GP108B chip with NVIDIA's Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at Samsung. It contains 1,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.3M per mm². This is a small, efficient mobile chip from the GeForce MX (3xx) generation, released in February 2020. The MX330 has base and boost clocks of 1,531 MHz and 1,594 MHz, respectively, while the GTX 460 v2 has no base or boost clock listed in the data.

The architectural gap is stark: Fermi 2.0 is a 40 nm design from 2011, while Pascal is a 14 nm design from 2020. The MX330's transistor density is more than four times higher (24.3M vs 5.9M per mm²), reflecting the process node advantage. The GTX 460 v2 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, while the MX330 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MX330 also lists FP16 support at 19.13 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), which the GTX 460 v2 does not list at all. The GTX 460 v2's predecessor is the GeForce 200 series and its successor is the GeForce 500 series; the MX330 has no listed predecessor or successor.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload and platform. For raw compute in OpenCL, the GTX 460 v2 wins with an 8,743 score versus 7,896 for the MX330, a 10.7% advantage. If the task is bandwidth-heavy, the GTX 460 v2's 96.19 GB/s memory bandwidth and 192-bit bus give it a structural edge that the MX330 cannot overcome. The GTX 460 v2 also has more TMUs and ROPs, which translates to higher texture throughput (43.62 GTexel/s vs 38.26 GTexel/s).

For users prioritizing power efficiency or modern API support, the MX330 is the logical choice. Its 10 W TDP is a fraction of the GTX 460 v2's 160 W, it needs no power connectors, and it ships with Vulkan 1.4 support. The MX330 also offers higher FP32 compute (1,224.2 GFLOPS vs 1,046.3 GFLOPS), a faster pixel rate (25.50 GPixel/s vs 10.91 GPixel/s), and double the memory capacity (2 GB vs 1 GB).

The GTX 460 v2 ranks at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, while the MX330 ranks at the 43rd percentile — nearly identical overall positions. But the head-to-head OpenCL result is unambiguous: the GTX 460 v2 is 10.7% faster in that test. The MX330's Vulkan score of 9,019 is its strongest data point, but with no comparable Vulkan result for the GTX 460 v2, it cannot be used as a direct comparison.

Choose the GTX 460 v2 if the workload is OpenCL-heavy, bandwidth-sensitive, or texture-bound, and if a desktop form factor with a 450 W PSU and dual-slot card is acceptable. Choose the MX330 if the priority is low power draw, modern API support (Vulkan 1.4, DirectX 12_1), or portable-device integration with no external power connectors. The data shows a narrow overall performance gap — 44th versus 43rd percentile — but the GTX 460 v2's decisive win in the only shared benchmark makes it the stronger compute card, while the MX330's efficiency and feature set make it the more versatile modern option.