GeForce2 MX vs GeForce4 MX 460
GeForce2 MX
Popular choices:
GeForce4 MX 460
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 GeForce2 MX is positioned at rank 754 and the GeForce4 MX 460 is on rank 384, so the GeForce4 MX 460 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce2 MX
Performance Per Dollar GeForce4 MX 460
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce2 MX is significantly newer (2022 vs 2010). The GeForce2 MX likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce4 MX 460 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce4 MX 460 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 33.3% higher G3D Mark score and 98.4% more VRAM (128 MB vs 65 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce2 MX.
| Insight | GeForce2 MX | GeForce4 MX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-33.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+33.3%) |
| Longevity | Ampere (2020−2025) (8nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+98.4%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce4 MX 460 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $15 versus $49 for the GeForce2 MX, it costs 69% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 335.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce2 MX | GeForce4 MX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+335.6%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49) | ✅More affordable ($15) |
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 GeForce2 MX and GeForce4 MX 460
GeForce2 MX
The GeForce2 MX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in Maio 2022. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 832 MHz to 1155 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 25W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 16 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3 points.
GeForce4 MX 460
The GeForce4 MX 460 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 12 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 675 MHz. It has 336 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 160W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points. Launch price was $229.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce2 MX scores 3 versus the GeForce4 MX 460's 4 — the GeForce4 MX 460 leads by 33.3%. The GeForce2 MX is built on Ampere while the GeForce4 MX 460 uses Fermi, both on 8 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (GeForce2 MX) vs 336 (GeForce4 MX 460). Raw compute: 4.731 TFLOPS (GeForce2 MX) vs 0.9072 TFLOPS (GeForce4 MX 460).
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | GeForce4 MX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3 | 4+33% |
| Architecture | Ampere | Fermi |
| Process Node | 8 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+510% | 336 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.731 TFLOPS+421% | 0.9072 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 40+25% | 32 |
| TMUs | 64+14% | 56 |
| L1 Cache | 2 MB+355% | 0.44 MB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | GeForce4 MX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce2 MX comes with 65 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce4 MX 460 has 128 MB. The GeForce4 MX 460 offers 98.4% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce2 MX) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce4 MX 460) — the GeForce2 MX has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | GeForce4 MX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.063 GB | 0.125 GB+98% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 7.0 (GeForce2 MX) vs 7.0 (GeForce4 MX 460). OpenGL: 1.2 vs 1.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 1.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | GeForce4 MX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 7.0 | 7.0 |
| OpenGL | 1.2 | 1.3+8% |
| Max Displays | 2+100% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce2 MX) vs No (GeForce4 MX 460). Decoder: MPEG-2 Decoder vs No.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | GeForce4 MX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | No |
| Decoder | MPEG-2 Decoder | No |
| Codecs | MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce2 MX draws 25W versus the GeForce4 MX 460's 160W — a 145.9% difference. The GeForce2 MX is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce2 MX) vs 350W (GeForce4 MX 460). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 160mm vs 165mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 60°C vs 60°C.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | GeForce4 MX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 25W-84% | 160W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 160mm | 165mm |
| Height | 111mm | 100mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 60°C | 60°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.1 | 0.0 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce2 MX launched at $129 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the GeForce4 MX 460 launched at $179 and now averages $15. The GeForce4 MX 460 costs 69.4% less ($34 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.1 (GeForce2 MX) vs 0.3 (GeForce4 MX 460) — the GeForce4 MX 460 offers 200% better value. The GeForce2 MX is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2010).
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | GeForce4 MX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129-28% | $179 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49 | $15-69% |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.1 | 0.3+200% |
| Codename | GA107 | GF104 |
| Release | Maio 2022 | July 12 2010 |
| Ranking | #407 | #652 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce2 MX and GeForce4 MX 460
