NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M Comparison

The Verdict

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M is the clear performance leader in this comparison. The recorded benchmark data shows the GTX 850M winning the only head-to-head test, Geekbench OpenCL, with a score of 9821 against 7925 for the GTX 460. That is a 23.9% advantage for the mobile part. The GTX 850M also sits higher in the overall database ranking, at the 46th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 460 sits at the 41st percentile. The average benchmark score for the GTX 850M is 9302, which is significantly higher than the GTX 460's 7925 average.

For potential buyers or system builders, the data points to the GTX 850M as the better pick for raw compute performance. It is also worth remembering the GTX 850M has a much lower thermal design power of 45 W versus the GTX 460's 160 W, making it the more efficient option by a substantial margin. The GTX 460, however, does retain some advantages in memory bandwidth, a specification area where the newer part lags behind.

The GTX 850M wins solely on performance metrics. The GTX 460 should only be considered by those specifically requiring a legacy desktop card with GDDR5 memory, a 192-bit bus, and higher memory bandwidth, or a particular display output configuration. For everything else, the database indicates the GTX 850M is the superior choice.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architectures and manufacturing processes. The GTX 850M is built on the Maxwell architecture using the GM107 chip, produced on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The GTX 460 uses the older Fermi architecture with the GF104 chip, manufactured on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. This process difference is reflected in the transistor density: the GTX 850M packs 12.6 million transistors per square millimeter, while the GTX 460 only manages 5.9 million. The GTX 850M has a die size of 148 mm² and houses 1,870 million transistors, whereas the GTX 460 has a much larger die at 332 mm² with 1,950 million transistors.

The GTX 850M is from the GeForce 800M generation and its predecessor is the GeForce 700M, with its successor being the GeForce 900M. The GTX 460 belongs to the GeForce 400 generation, with the GeForce 200 as its predecessor and the GeForce 500 as its successor. The GTX 850M is a mobile part with an IGP slot width and no power connectors, while the GTX 460 is a dual-slot desktop card requiring two 6-pin power connectors and a suggested PSU of 450 W.

Memory configurations differ sharply. The GTX 850M uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1001 MHz and 2 Gbps effective. Its bandwidth is 32.03 GB/s. The GTX 460 uses 768 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, with a memory clock of 900 MHz and 3.6 Gbps effective, and a bandwidth of 86.40 GB/s. This gives the older card more than 2.6 times the memory bandwidth of the newer mobile chip.

Core counts show the GTX 850M with 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 460 has 336 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The GTX 850M has more shaders, but the GTX 460 has more TMUs and ROPs. In terms of compute rates, the GTX 850M delivers a pixel rate of 14.43 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 36.08 GTexel/s, while the GTX 460 achieves a pixel rate of 9.450 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 37.80 GTexel/s. The GTX 850M has a higher pixel rate, while the GTX 460 has a slightly higher texture rate. FP32 performance is 1,154.6 GFLOPS for the GTX 850M versus 907.2 GFLOPS for the GTX 460.

The GTX 850M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 460 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed. The bus interface also differs: the GTX 850M uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the GTX 460 uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The GTX 850M scores 9821, and the GTX 460 scores 7925. This yields a delta of 23.9% in favor of the GTX 850M. The margin is substantial and aligns with the average benchmark scores: the GTX 850M averages 9302, while the GTX 460 averages 7925.

The GTX 850M's nearest rivals in the database rankings provide context for interpreting its score. It is within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465, which averages 9294, and within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon R7 M380, which averages 9313. The GTX 850M is also 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960, which averages 9273, and 0.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon Vega 8, which averages 9221. The GTX 850M is effectively at parity with these four parts, all clustered within a narrow band around its average score.

The GTX 460's nearest rivals show a different picture of an older card performing alongside other NVIDIA professional mobile GPUs. The GTX 460 is within 0.2% of the NVIDIA Quadro K4100M, which averages 7906. It is 1.4% behind the NVIDIA Quadro P5000, which averages 8039, and 1.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M, which averages 8040. It is also 1.6% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti, which averages 8053. These deltas show the GTX 460 trailing its nearest rivals by a small but consistent margin.

The single head-to-head result gives the GTX 850M one win and the GTX 460 zero wins. The performance gap is not marginal; it is a clear 23.9% difference in the OpenCL compute workload.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the GTX 850M and the GTX 460:

• Architecture: Maxwell for the GTX 850M, Fermi for the GTX 460.
• Process node: 28 nm for the GTX 850M, 40 nm for the GTX 460.
• Die size: 148 mm² for the GTX 850M, 332 mm² for the GTX 460.
• Transistors: 1,870 million for the GTX 850M, 1,950 million for the GTX 460.
• Transistor density: 12.6M per mm² for the GTX 850M, 5.9M per mm² for the GTX 460.
• Memory size: 2 GB for the GTX 850M, 768 MB for the GTX 460.
• Memory type: DDR3 for the GTX 850M, GDDR5 for the GTX 460.
• Memory bus width: 128 bit for the GTX 850M, 192 bit for the GTX 460.
• Memory clock: 1001 MHz and 2 Gbps effective for the GTX 850M, 900 MHz and 3.6 Gbps effective for the GTX 460.
• Memory bandwidth: 32.03 GB/s for the GTX 850M, 86.40 GB/s for the GTX 460.
• Shading units: 640 for the GTX 850M, 336 for the GTX 460.
• TMUs: 40 for the GTX 850M, 56 for the GTX 460.
• ROPs: 16 for the GTX 850M, 24 for the GTX 460.
• Pixel rate: 14.43 GPixel/s for the GTX 850M, 9.450 GPixel/s for the GTX 460.
• Texture rate: 36.08 GTexel/s for the GTX 850M, 37.80 GTexel/s for the GTX 460.
• FP32: 1,154.6 GFLOPS for the GTX 850M, 907.2 GFLOPS for the GTX 460.
• TDP: 45 W for the GTX 850M, 160 W for the GTX 460.
• Slot width: IGP for the GTX 850M, Dual-slot for the GTX 460.
• Power connectors: None for the GTX 850M, 2x 6-pin for the GTX 460.
• Suggested PSU: none listed for the GTX 850M, 450 W for the GTX 460.
• Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 for the GTX 850M, PCIe 2.0 x16 for the GTX 460.
• Display outputs: Portable Device Dependent for the GTX 850M, 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a for the GTX 460.
• Vulkan support: 1.4 for the GTX 850M, not supported for the GTX 460.
• Dimensions: no length listed for the GTX 850M, 210 mm (8.3 inches) for the GTX 460.
• Release date: 2014-03-11 for the GTX 850M, 2010-07-11 for the GTX 460.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the head-to-head benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M wins the only head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 9821 against the GTX 460's 7925, a 23.9% advantage.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The GTX 850M has an average benchmark score of 9302, while the GTX 460 has an average of 7925.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 460 has significantly higher memory bandwidth at 86.40 GB/s, while the GTX 850M has 32.03 GB/s.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The GTX 850M also supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 460 has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: How do their thermal design power ratings differ?

A: The GTX 850M has a TDP of 45 W, while the GTX 460 has a TDP of 160 W.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two?

A: The GTX 850M has a transistor density of 12.6M per mm², while the GTX 460 has a density of 5.9M per mm².