NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M

Launched in early September 2010, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M represents the Fermi architecture in the mobile segment, built on TSMC's 40 nm process. This MXM-module GPU packs 1,170 million transistors into a 238 mm² die, yielding a density of 4.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The benchmark data positions this part squarely in the entry-level to lower-midrange category of its era, with a single OpenCL score of 4275 points and a percentile rank of 24, meaning it outperforms roughly a quarter of all GPUs in the database. The specifications reveal a deliberate balance: 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs, paired with a 192-bit memory interface. Clock speeds are modest, with memory running at 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective), producing a bandwidth of 60.00 GB/s. The compute throughput stands at 518.4 GFLOPS FP32, with pixel and texture rates of 5.400 GPixel/s and 21.60 GTexel/s, respectively. This is an end-of-life product, succeeded by the GeForce 500M series, and the data suggests its historical relevance outweighs any current competitive standing.

Benchmark Performance

The GeForce GTX 460M delivers an average benchmark score of 4275, a figure that places it in a surprisingly tight cluster with several rivals. The closest comparison is the AMD FirePro W2100, which scores 4295, a delta of -0.5% — meaning the GTX 460M trails by half a percent, a margin well within typical run-to-run variance. Against the AMD Radeon Vega 3, the GTX 460M leads by a razor-thin 0.2%, with the Vega 3 scoring 4268. These two results indicate that for synthetic OpenCL workloads, the GTX 460M is effectively performance-equivalent to both a low-end integrated solution from a much later generation and a professional workstation card from a similar era.

The gap widens slightly when compared to the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M, which scores 4241. Here, the GTX 460M is 0.8% ahead, a modest but consistent advantage. The most decisive delta comes against the NVIDIA GeForce 830M, which scores 4166; the GTX 460M leads by 2.6%. While a 2.6% advantage is not transformative, it does demonstrate that the older Fermi architecture still holds a measurable edge over a Kepler-based mobile part from a subsequent generation. The percentile rank of 24 underscores the reality: this GPU sits in the lower quartile of all recorded GPUs, meaning the vast majority of modern hardware, even integrated graphics, will outpace it in raw compute.

Interpreting these numbers requires context. The 0.2% delta against the Vega 3 is particularly telling because the Vega 3 is an integrated graphics processor found in budget laptops from around 2018. The near-parity suggests that the GTX 460M's dedicated memory and higher shader count compensate for its older architecture and lower clock speeds. However, the score of 4275 is a single OpenCL test, not a gaming benchmark; real-world gaming performance may diverge from this synthetic result due to driver maturity, memory bandwidth constraints, and feature support differences. The data implies that the GTX 460M was a competent part for its time but is now firmly in legacy territory.

Who Should Consider It

Given the benchmark scores, the GTX 460M is only suitable for users with very specific, low-demand use cases. At a score of 4275, with a 60.00 GB/s memory bandwidth and 1536 MB of GDDR5 VRAM, this GPU can handle classic titles from its launch era (roughly 2010) at 720p or 1366x768 resolution with medium to low settings. For games released before 2012, the 518.4 GFLOPS of FP32 compute is sufficient for 30 frames per second in many titles, provided the game is not particularly shader-heavy. The 2.6% lead over the GeForce 830M suggests it can match or slightly exceed that card's performance, which is relevant because the 830M was often used in budget laptops for light gaming.

At 1080p resolution, the data does not support a positive recommendation. The memory bandwidth of 60.00 GB/s is a bottleneck for modern titles, and the 192-bit bus, while respectable for 2010, cannot feed enough data to the 192 shaders for high-resolution textures. Users considering this GPU for esports titles like older versions of League of Legends or Counter-Strike: Global Offensive might find playable frame rates at low settings, but the 24th percentile ranking warns that even integrated graphics from the last five years will outperform it. The 0.5% deficit against the FirePro W2100 further reinforces that this is not a part for any current gaming workload. It is best suited for retro gaming, legacy software, or as a display-output solution for a laptop that needs a dedicated GPU for basic acceleration.

Ray Tracing and Feature Set

The GTX 460M has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores, as these are features from much later architectures. The Fermi architecture, while supporting DirectX 12 (11_0), does not include hardware acceleration for ray tracing or any AI-based upscaling technologies like DLSS. The API support includes OpenGL 4.6, which is surprisingly modern for a 2010 GPU, but Vulkan is not listed as supported — a significant limitation for modern cross-platform titles that rely on Vulkan for performance. The DirectX 12 support is limited to the 11_0 feature level, meaning the card cannot use DirectX 12 Ultimate features like mesh shaders or variable rate shading.

The absence of dedicated RT and tensor cores means any ray-traced effects would be handled by the 192 shading units in a purely compute-based manner, which would be impractically slow. The pixel rate of 5.400 GPixel/s and texture rate of 21.60 GTexel/s provide baseline rasterization capability, but these are low figures by modern standards. The display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," indicating that the actual ports vary by laptop manufacturer, so users cannot assume HDMI 2.1 or DisplayPort 1.4 support. For feature-set purposes, this GPU is a pure rasterizer with no forward-looking capabilities; its value lies solely in its compatibility with older DirectX 11 titles.

Power and Cooling

The GTX 460M has a thermal design power (TDP) of 50 W, a modest figure for a dedicated mobile GPU of its generation. The power connectors are listed as "None," meaning the card draws all its power from the MXM slot itself, which simplifies installation in compatible laptops. There is no suggested PSU listed, but given the 50 W TDP, a standard laptop power adapter rated for the system's total draw (CPU plus GPU) would suffice; no external power is required. The slot width is "MXM Module," indicating a standardized form factor for notebook upgrades, though the "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs mean the cooling solution is proprietary to each laptop chassis.

Cooling requirements are modest due to the 50 W TDP. The 40 nm process node from TSMC is relatively inefficient by modern standards, but 50 W is still low enough for a single heat pipe and small fan in most 15-inch laptops from 2010. The absence of power connectors is a notable advantage for upgrading older systems, as it eliminates the risk of overloading a laptop's power delivery system. The data shows no clock boost or base clock figures, so thermal throttling behavior cannot be quantified, but the low TDP suggests the card should sustain its memory clock of 625 MHz under load without excessive heat buildup.

FAQ

Q: How does the GTX 460M compare to the AMD Radeon Vega 3?

A: The GTX 460M scores 4275, while the Vega 3 scores 4268, giving the GTX 460M a 0.2% advantage. This is a statistical tie, meaning the two are essentially equal in OpenCL compute performance despite the Vega 3 being a much newer integrated GPU.

Q: Does the GTX 460M support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: No. The card supports DirectX 12 (11_0), which is the base feature level of DirectX 12, but not the Ultimate feature set. It also does not support Vulkan, and its ray tracing and tensor cores are listed as null, meaning they do not exist in the hardware.

Q: What is the memory configuration of the GTX 460M?

A: It has 1536 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, with a memory clock of 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective), resulting in a bandwidth of 60.00 GB/s. This is sufficient for 720p gaming in its era but limiting for 1080p with high-resolution textures.

Q: Is the GTX 460M suitable for modern gaming?

A: Benchmark results indicate a 24th percentile ranking, meaning 76% of all GPUs are faster. With only 518.4 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, it is not suitable for modern titles at any reasonable settings; it is best for games released around 2010-2012 at low settings.

Q: What power connector does the GTX 460M require?

A: The power connectors are listed as "None." The card draws all power through the MXM slot interface, and its 50 W TDP does not require any supplementary power cables.

Q: How does it fare against the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M?

A: The GTX 460M scores 4275, which is 0.8% higher than the Quadro K3000M's score of 4241. The performance gap is minor, but the GTX 460M holds a slight edge in this specific benchmark.

Memory Subsystem

The memory subsystem of the GTX 460M is defined by 1536 MB of GDDR5 VRAM, a 192-bit bus width, and a bandwidth of 60.00 GB/s. The memory clock is 625 MHz, translating to 2.5 Gbps effective. For its time, this configuration was competitive, offering a balance between capacity and speed. The 192-bit bus is wider than the 128-bit interfaces common in entry-level cards of that era, which helps mitigate the relatively low memory clock. However, the 60.00 GB/s bandwidth is a critical limitation for high-resolution gaming; at 1080p, modern textures can easily exceed this throughput, causing stuttering and texture pop-in.

The 1536 MB capacity is another constraint. While 1.5 GB was ample for 2010 titles, games from 2015 onward often require 2 GB or more for medium settings at 1080p. The pixel rate of 5.400 GPixel/s and texture rate of 21.60 GTexel/s further suggest that fill-rate limitations will appear before memory capacity becomes the bottleneck. For users considering this GPU for high-resolution work, the data is unambiguous: the 60.00 GB/s bandwidth is roughly half of what a mid-range card from 2015 offers, and the 192-bit bus cannot compensate for the low clock speed. In practical terms, this memory subsystem is adequate for 720p gaming with reduced texture quality, but it will struggle with any workload that demands high memory bandwidth, such as 1440p rendering or large compute tasks.

How It Compares

vs. AMD Radeon Vega 3: The GTX 460M leads by 0.2%, with scores of 4275 versus 4268. This negligible delta indicates that a 2010 dedicated GPU and a 2018 integrated GPU perform identically in OpenCL, a testament to how far integrated graphics have advanced. The GTX 460M's dedicated VRAM and higher shader count are neutralized by the Vega 3's newer architecture and higher clocks.

vs. AMD FirePro W2100: The FirePro W2100 scores 4295, giving it a 0.5% lead over the GTX 460M. This is a very tight margin, suggesting that for professional OpenCL workloads, the two are interchangeable. The FirePro's workstation drivers might offer better stability, but the raw compute scores are nearly identical.

vs. NVIDIA Quadro K3000M: The GTX 460M is 0.8% ahead, scoring 4275 versus 4241. This is a surprising result given the K3000M is a Kepler-based professional card from a later generation. The data implies that the Fermi architecture's higher shader count (192 versus the K3000M's 384, though the latter is not specified here) does not translate into a linear performance advantage, as the K3000M's newer design is more efficient per core.

vs. NVIDIA GeForce 830M: The GTX 460M holds a 2.6% lead, with scores of 4275 versus 4166. This is the largest delta among the rivals, indicating that the older Fermi card outperforms the Kepler-based 830M by a meaningful margin. The 830M was a low-end mobile part, so this comparison shows the GTX 460M, despite its age, retains a competitive edge over the weakest of its successor's generation.