GeForce4 MX 460 vs RADEON 9250

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.

GeForce4 MX 460 vs RADEON 9250 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce4 MX 460 vs RADEON 9250: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce4 MX 460

2010

Why buy it

✅+33.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 128 MB vs 256 MB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2010 hardware with 128 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
126.6% HIGHER MSRP
$179 MSRPvs$79 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.0 vs 0.0 G3D/$ ($179 MSRP vs $79 MSRP).
❌68.4% higher power demand at 160W vs 95W.

RADEON 9250

2015

Why buy it

✅Costs $100 less on MSRP ($79 MSRP vs $179 MSRP).
✅Delivers 69.9% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 0.0 vs 0.0 G3D/$ ($79 MSRP vs $179 MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (256 MB vs 128 MB).
✅Draws 95W instead of 160W, a 65W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (3 vs 4).
❌2015 hardware with 256 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce4 MX 460 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 33.3% in PassMark G3D (4 vs 3), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce4 MX 460 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond because it comes out ahead on the available hardware-headroom signals for this matchup.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

RADEON 9250 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $100 cheaper on MSRP at $79 vs $179, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 69.9% (0.0 vs 0.0), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, RADEON 9250 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, GeForce4 MX 460 has the stronger long-term case.

GeForce4 MX 460 vs RADEON 9250 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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.

RADEON 9250

The RADEON 9250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 29 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 735 MHz to 1000 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 95W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce4 MX 460 scores 4 versus the RADEON 9250's 3 — the GeForce4 MX 460 leads by 33.3%. The GeForce4 MX 460 is built on Fermi while the RADEON 9250 uses GCN 3.0, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 336 (GeForce4 MX 460) vs 2,048 (RADEON 9250). Raw compute: 0.9072 TFLOPS (GeForce4 MX 460) vs 4.096 TFLOPS (RADEON 9250).

Feature	GeForce4 MX 460	RADEON 9250
G3D Mark Score	4+33%	3
Architecture	Fermi	GCN 3.0
Process Node	40 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	336	2048+510%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.9072 TFLOPS	4.096 TFLOPS+351%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	56	128+129%
L1 Cache	448 KB	512 KB+14%
L2 Cache	512 KB	512 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce4 MX 460 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The RADEON 9250 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce4 MX 460	RADEON 9250
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce4 MX 460 has 128 MB of VRAM, while the RADEON 9250 carries 256 MB. RADEON 9250 gives you 100% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the GeForce4 MX 460 and 64-bit on the RADEON 9250.

Feature	GeForce4 MX 460	RADEON 9250
VRAM Capacity	0.125 GB	0.25 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	512 KB	512 KB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce4 MX 460 draws 160W versus the RADEON 9250's 95W — a 51% difference. The RADEON 9250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce4 MX 460) vs 350W (RADEON 9250). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.

Feature	GeForce4 MX 460	RADEON 9250
TDP	160W	95W-41%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Legacy
Length	165mm	—
Height	100mm	—
Slots	1	—
Temp (Load)	60°C	—
Perf/Watt	0.0	0.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce4 MX 460 came in at $179, while the RADEON 9250 launched at $79. On MSRP, RADEON 9250 was 55.9% cheaper ($100 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 0.0 (GeForce4 MX 460) vs 0.0 (RADEON 9250) — the RADEON 9250 offers 0% better value. The newer card here is RADEON 9250 (2015 vs 2010).

Feature	GeForce4 MX 460	RADEON 9250
MSRP	$179	$79-56%
Performance per Dollar	0.0	0.0
Codename	GF104	Amethyst
Release	July 12 2010	September 29 2015
Ranking	#652	#420

Search GeForce4 MX 460 on Amazon

Search RADEON 9250 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.