NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is not close. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52,998, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 scores 7,925. That is a delta of 568.7% in favor of the newer part. In plain terms, the RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers roughly 6.7 times the compute throughput in this particular workload, a gap so large that the GTX 460 cannot be considered competitive in any modern GPU compute scenario.

Looking at the average benchmark scores tells a similar story, though the database only records one result for the GTX 460, so the comparison is limited. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has an average benchmark score of 8,746, while the GTX 460 sits at 7,925. The delta between the two is not listed directly in the head-to-head table, but the nearest rivals for the RTX 3050 A Mobile include the GTX 460 v2 with an average score of 8,743, essentially a tie (0% delta). The GTX 460 v2 is a different card from the base GTX 460, but it shows that the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s aggregate score sits right at the level of a much older desktop GPU family.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile also has a full Passmark suite of results, while the GTX 460 has none recorded. The mobile card scores 11,664 in Passmark G3D, 4,419 in GPU compute, 526 in G2D, and 152 in DirectX 9, 94 in DirectX 11, 61 in DirectX 10, and 55 in DirectX 12. Without corresponding GTX 460 numbers, these cannot be directly compared, but the absolute values indicate a part that is far more capable across legacy and modern API tests. The GTX 460’s only benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, is its single recorded data point, and it is decisively lower.

The wins tally is one for the RTX 3050 A Mobile and zero for the GTX 460. There is no test in the database where the GTX 460 comes out ahead. The percentile ranking supports this: the RTX 3050 A Mobile sits at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 460 sits at the 41st percentile. That is a modest overall ranking difference, but the OpenCL gap shows how far the newer architecture has pulled ahead in raw compute.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different eras of NVIDIA’s design. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the GA106 chip on the Ampere architecture, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The GTX 460 uses the GF104 chip on the Fermi architecture, built on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The node difference alone, 8 nm versus 40 nm, explains a substantial portion of the performance gap, as the newer process allows far more transistors in a similar power envelope.

Transistor counts reinforce this. The GA106 packs 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The GF104 has 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, a density of just 5.9 million per square millimeter. The RTX 3050 A Mobile fits over six times as many transistors into a smaller physical area, and those transistors are doing more specialized work.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile includes 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores, hardware that simply does not exist on the GTX 460. The Fermi chip has no ray tracing or tensor core support, as those features were introduced years later. The shader configuration also differs drastically: the RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1,792 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, while the GTX 460 has 336 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The TMU count is identical, but the shader count is more than five times higher on the newer part.

Memory technology is another generational leap. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 460 uses 768 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 86.40 GB/s. Even though the bus is narrower on the newer card, the faster memory type and higher effective clock (12 Gbps versus 3.6 Gbps) more than double the bandwidth. The GTX 460 also has a much smaller frame buffer, which limits its ability to handle modern textures and resolutions.

Power consumption tells a story of efficiency gains. The RTX 3050 A Mobile is rated at 45 W TDP, while the GTX 460 is rated at 160 W. The newer card delivers roughly 5.3 times the FP32 throughput (4.813 TFLOPS versus 907.2 GFLOPS) while consuming less than a third of the power. The GTX 460 requires two 6-pin power connectors and a 450 W suggested power supply, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile has no power connectors at all and is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) form factor, meaning it is designed for laptops where power is drawn from the motherboard.

The bus interface also differs: the RTX 3050 A Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the GTX 460 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The newer card’s interface offers more bandwidth per lane, which matters for data transfer in compute workloads. Display outputs on the RTX 3050 A Mobile are listed as portable device dependent, while the GTX 460 has fixed outputs: 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a. The GTX 460 is a dual-slot desktop card measuring 210 mm in length, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile has no dimensions listed because it is an IGP for mobile systems.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1,792 shading units, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 has 336 shading units.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers 192.0 GB/s from 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, while the GTX 460 delivers 86.40 GB/s from 768 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus.

Q: Does the GTX 460 support ray tracing?

A: No. The GTX 460 has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The RTX 3050 A Mobile includes 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 3050 A Mobile in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52,998 versus 7,925 for the GTX 460, a 568.7% delta in favor of the RTX 3050 A Mobile.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile has a 45 W TDP and uses no power connectors, while the GTX 460 has a 160 W TDP and requires two 6-pin power connectors with a 450 W suggested power supply.

Q: Which architecture does each GPU use?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the Ampere architecture on an 8 nm Samsung process, while the GTX 460 uses the Fermi architecture on a 40 nm TSMC process.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs in the database:

• Process Node: 8 nm (Samsung) versus 40 nm (TSMC)
• Transistors: 12,000 million versus 1,950 million
• Die Size: 276 mm² versus 332 mm²
• Transistor Density: 43.5M / mm² versus 5.9M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1065 MHz versus null (not specified for GTX 460)
• Boost Clock: 1343 MHz versus null (not specified for GTX 460)
• Memory Clock: 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) versus 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: 4 GB versus 768 MB
• Memory Type: GDDR6 versus GDDR5
• Memory Bus Width: 128 bit versus 192 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 192.0 GB/s versus 86.40 GB/s
• Shading Units: 1792 versus 336
• ROPs: 32 versus 24
• RT Cores: 14 versus null (none)
• Tensor Cores: 56 versus null (none)
• Pixel Rate: 42.98 GPixel/s versus 9.450 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 75.21 GTexel/s versus 37.80 GTexel/s
• FP32: 4.813 TFLOPS versus 907.2 GFLOPS
• FP16: 4.813 TFLOPS (1:1) versus null (not supported)
• TDP: 45 W versus 160 W
• Slot Width: IGP versus Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: None versus 2x 6-pin
• Suggested PSU: null versus 450 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 2.0 x16
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent versus 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a
• Dimensions: null versus 210 mm (8.3 inches) length
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (11_0)
• Vulkan Support: 1.4 versus null (not supported)
• Release Date: 2023-12-31 versus 2010-07-11
• Predecessor: GeForce 20 Mobile versus GeForce 200
• Successor: null versus GeForce 500
• Launch MSRP: null versus 199 USD
• Benchmark Scores: RTX 3050 A Mobile has 8 recorded results; GTX 460 has 1 recorded result

Fields that are the same include the manufacturer (NVIDIA) and the OpenGL API version (4.6 for both). The TMU count is also identical at 56.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3050 A Mobile wins in every measurable category in the database. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 568.7% higher, its FP32 throughput is over five times greater, its memory bandwidth is more than double, and its pixel rate is over four times higher. It also supports modern APIs including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 460 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and has no Vulkan support.

The GTX 460’s only advantage is not in performance but in form factor heritage. It is a dual-slot desktop card with fixed display outputs (2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI), which makes it suitable for legacy desktop builds where those outputs are required. It also has a wider memory bus (192 bit versus 128 bit), though the lower memory clock and older GDDR5 type mean that wider bus does not translate to a bandwidth advantage. The GTX 460 was released in 2010 with a launch MSRP of 199 USD, making it a product of its era, but the database records no benchmark where it beats the RTX 3050 A Mobile.

For users working with portable systems, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the only viable option, as it is an IGP designed for laptops with no power connectors. The GTX 460 requires a 450 W power supply and two 6-pin connectors, which rules it out for any mobile or compact integrated build. The RTX 3050 A Mobile also supports ray tracing and tensor cores, which are essential for any workload involving DLSS or ray-traced rendering, neither of which the GTX 460 can handle.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile is the superior GPU in every recorded benchmark and every architectural specification that matters for modern workloads. Its 568.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL, its 5.3x advantage in FP32 throughput, and its support for ray tracing and tensor cores make it the clear choice for any application involving compute, modern games, or AI-accelerated tasks. The GTX 460, by contrast, is a legacy part from 2010 with no ray tracing, no tensor cores, no Vulkan support, and a memory pool of only 768 MB that cannot handle modern textures.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile also wins decisively on efficiency. It delivers its performance at 45 W TDP with no external power connectors, while the GTX 460 requires 160 W and a 450 W power supply. That efficiency gap, combined with the performance gap, means there is no scenario in the database where the GTX 460 is the rational pick for a new build. The GTX 460’s only niche would be a retro desktop system that specifically needs DVI outputs and a dual-slot card, but even then, its lower percentile ranking (41st versus 44th) and its single benchmark score place it firmly behind.

For anyone choosing between these two, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the only sensible option. It offers modern API support, far higher compute throughput, and a fraction of the power draw. The GTX 460 remains a historical artifact, a Fermi-era card that served its purpose in 2010 but has no place in any current workload recorded in the database. The verdict is simple: the RTX 3050 A Mobile wins outright, and the GTX 460 should only be considered for collectors or legacy systems that cannot use an IGP form factor.