NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Comparison

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 — a head-to-head spanning two distinct eras of NVIDIA’s GPU architecture. The data available in the benchmark database shows a single shared test result, but that result is decisive: the GTX 980 dominates the GTX 460 in raw compute performance by a wide margin, reflecting nearly five years of architectural progression between the Fermi and Maxwell generations.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only benchmark where both GPUs have recorded scores is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are lopsided. The GTX 980 scores 34,676 points, while the GTX 460 scores 7,925 points. That translates to a delta of 337.6% in favor of the GTX 980 — the newer card is roughly 4.4 times faster in this compute-oriented workload. The GTX 980’s OpenCL score is not just a win; it is a generational annihilation.

For context, the GTX 980’s average benchmark score across all its tested workloads is 8,167, which places it at the 43rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M (average score 8,135, delta 0.4%), the AMD Radeon R9 M360 (8,129, delta 0.5%), and the NVIDIA GeForce 945M (8,099, delta 0.8%). The GTX 980 sits in a tight cluster of mid-range mobile and entry-level desktop parts, which is surprising given its 4.981 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, but the average is dragged down by its weaker DirectX 10, 11, and 12 scores — 53, 83, and 46 respectively. Its strongest individual results are the Geekbench Vulkan score of 22,543 and the Passmark G3D score of 11,095.

The GTX 460, by contrast, has only one benchmark entry in the database — the same Geekbench OpenCL test — and its average score is therefore 7,925. That places it at the 41st percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA Quadro K4100M (7,906, delta 0.2%), the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 (8,039, delta -1.4%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M (8,040, delta -1.4%). The GTX 460 is essentially within 1.6% of its closest competitors, but the GTX 980 is 337.6% ahead of it in the only shared test. That is not a close contest; it is a mismatch on the order of multiple hardware generations.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner: the GTX 980 outperforms the GTX 460 by an enormous margin in the one benchmark both cards share. The Geekbench OpenCL delta of 337.6% is the single most telling statistic in this comparison. If a user is choosing between these two cards for any compute-heavy workload, the GTX 980 is the only rational choice based on the available scores.

However, the verdict is not solely about raw performance. The GTX 460 does have one advantage in the data: its launch MSRP was 199 USD. The GTX 980’s launch MSRP was 549 USD. But pricing is not a factor in this analysis, and the performance gap is so large that the GTX 980’s higher price is justified by its benchmark dominance. The GTX 980 also supports newer API features — DirectX 12 (12_1) versus DirectX 12 (11_0) on the GTX 460 — and Vulkan 1.4 versus no Vulkan support on the older card. The GTX 460 does support OpenGL 4.6, matching the GTX 980, but that is the only API parity.

For a user with legacy software that only needs OpenGL or DirectX 11 (the GTX 460 scores 83 in Passmark DirectX 11, though the GTX 980 scores the same), the GTX 460 might suffice. But for any modern workload, the GTX 980 is the definitive pick. The GTX 460’s lone benchmark score of 7,925 is less than a quarter of the GTX 980’s 34,676, and no amount of architectural nostalgia can close that gap. The GTX 980 wins the head-to-head, the average score comparison, and the API feature set comparison.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two GPUs explains the benchmark results. The GTX 980 is built on the GM204 chip using Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 5,200 million transistors into a 398 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million per square millimeter. The GTX 460, by contrast, uses the GF104 chip with Fermi architecture, also fabricated at TSMC but on a 40 nm process. It contains 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, for a transistor density of 5.9 million per square millimeter. The GTX 980 has more than 2.6 times the transistor count on a die that is only 20% larger, thanks to the denser process node.

The compute resources are equally divergent. The GTX 980 features 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The GTX 460 has 336 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. That is a 6.1x advantage in shading units, a 2.3x advantage in TMUs, and a 2.7x advantage in ROPs for the GTX 980. The clock speeds tell a similar story: the GTX 980 runs at a base clock of 1127 MHz with a boost of 1216 MHz, while the GTX 460 has no listed base or boost clock in the database, only a memory clock of 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective). The GTX 980’s memory clock is 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective), nearly double the GTX 460’s.

Memory configuration is another major differentiator. The GTX 980 comes with 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 224.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 460 has 768 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, for 86.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 980 has 2.6 times the bandwidth and over 5 times the memory capacity. The pixel rate and texture rate reflect these differences: the GTX 980 achieves 77.82 GPixel/s and 155.6 GTexel/s, while the GTX 460 manages 9.450 GPixel/s and 37.80 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 4.981 TFLOPS for the GTX 980 versus 907.2 GFLOPS for the GTX 460 — a 5.5x difference.

Power and interface specifications also differ. Both cards are dual-slot with a 165 W TDP for the GTX 980 and 160 W for the GTX 460, and both use 2x 6-pin power connectors with a 450 W suggested PSU. But the GTX 980 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the GTX 460 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs are more modern on the GTX 980: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.2, versus 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a on the GTX 460. The GTX 980 is also physically larger at 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, versus the GTX 460’s 210 mm length (height and width not listed).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 scores 34,676 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 scores 7,925 points. The GTX 980 wins with a delta of 337.6%.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The GTX 980 has an average benchmark score of 8,167 across all its tested workloads. The GTX 460 has an average benchmark score of 7,925, based on its single Geekbench OpenCL result.

Q: How do the GPUs compare in terms of memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The GTX 980 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 224.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 460 has 768 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, providing 86.40 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the DirectX and Vulkan API support levels?

A: The GTX 980 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 460 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) but has no Vulkan support listed. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What is the transistor count and process node for each chip?

A: The GTX 980 uses a 28 nm process with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die. The GTX 460 uses a 40 nm process with 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The GTX 980 delivers 4.981 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the GTX 460 delivers 907.2 GFLOPS. The GTX 980 is roughly 5.5 times faster in this metric.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 980 wins every category where data exists. The sole head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, goes to the GTX 980 by a 337.6% margin. Its average benchmark score of 8,167 is 3.1% higher than the GTX 460’s 7,925. In architecture, the GTX 980 has more shading units (2,048 vs 336), more TMUs (128 vs 56), more ROPs (64 vs 24), more memory (4 GB vs 768 MB), higher bandwidth (224.4 GB/s vs 86.40 GB/s), and higher pixel and texture rates (77.82 GPixel/s vs 9.450 GPixel/s, and 155.6 GTexel/s vs 37.80 GTexel/s). It also has a newer process node (28 nm vs 40 nm), a newer bus interface (PCIe 3.0 vs PCIe 2.0), and more modern display outputs.

The GTX 460’s wins are limited to physical size and legacy compatibility. It is shorter at 210 mm versus the GTX 980’s 267 mm, which may help in smaller cases. It has a lower TDP of 160 W versus 165 W, though both require a 450 W PSU. It also has a lower launch MSRP of 199 USD versus 549 USD, but that is a historical figure, not a performance metric. In terms of raw capability, the only place the GTX 460 is competitive is in the percentile ranking — it sits at the 41st percentile versus the GTX 980’s 43rd, a difference of just 2 percentage points. That narrow percentile gap is misleading, however, because the GTX 460’s percentile is based on a single benchmark, while the GTX 980’s is based on 11 different tests, including several where it scores poorly (e.g., Passmark DirectX 10 at 53, DirectX 12 at 46).

For real-world use cases, the data suggests the GTX 980 is the pick for any modern gaming, compute, or API-forward workload. Its Vulkan support alone makes it future-proof relative to the GTX 460, which lacks Vulkan entirely. The GTX 460 might still be usable for legacy DirectX 9 or OpenGL applications — it scores 164 in Passmark DirectX 9, which is actually higher than the GTX 980’s 53 in DirectX 10 and 46 in DirectX 12, though those are different tests. But for anyone comparing these two cards today, the GTX 980’s dominance in the shared benchmark and its superior specifications make it the only reasonable choice. The GTX 460 is a relic; the GTX 980, while also end-of-life, remains a far more capable piece of hardware.