
GeForce GTX 460M vs Radeon R9 M270X

GeForce GTX 460M
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 M270X
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce GTX 460M is positioned at rank 181 and the Radeon R9 M270X is on rank 484, so the GeForce GTX 460M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 460M
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R9 M270X
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 460M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Radeon R9 M270X offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 460M | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+166.7%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 460M offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 460M holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $40), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 1.2% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 460M | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1.2%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 460M and Radeon R9 M270X

GeForce GTX 460M
The GeForce GTX 460M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 3 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 675 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,218 points.

Radeon R9 M270X
The Radeon R9 M270X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 21 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 725 MHz to 775 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,204 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 460M scores 1,218 and the Radeon R9 M270X reaches 1,204 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 460M is built on Fermi while the Radeon R9 M270X uses GCN 1.0, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 192 (GeForce GTX 460M) vs 640 (Radeon R9 M270X). Raw compute: 0.5184 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 460M) vs 0.992 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M270X).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 460M | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,218+1% | 1,204 |
| Architecture | Fermi | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 640+233% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.5184 TFLOPS | 0.992 TFLOPS+91% |
| ROPs | 24+50% | 16 |
| TMUs | 32 | 40+25% |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB+60% | 160 KB |
| L2 Cache | 384 KB+50% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 460M | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 460M comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 M270X has 4 GB. The Radeon R9 M270X offers 166.7% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 384 KB (GeForce GTX 460M) vs 256 KB (Radeon R9 M270X) — the GeForce GTX 460M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 460M | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1.5 GB | 4 GB+167% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 384 KB+50% | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 460M draws 50W versus the Radeon R9 M270X's 75W — a 40% difference. The GeForce GTX 460M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 460M) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M270X). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs Mobile.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 460M | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-33% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | Mobile |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 24.4+52% | 16.1 |
Value Analysis
Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 30.4 (GeForce GTX 460M) vs 30.1 (Radeon R9 M270X) — the GeForce GTX 460M offers 1% better value. The Radeon R9 M270X is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2010).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 460M | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $250 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40 | $40 |
| Performance per Dollar | 30.4 | 30.1 |
| Codename | GF106 | Venus |
| Release | September 3 2010 | March 21 2014 |
| Ranking | #814 | #819 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















