Quadro M2000 vs Radeon RX 460

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.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon RX 460 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.8% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro M2000.

Insight	Quadro M2000	Radeon RX 460
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.8%)	✅Leading raw performance (+1.8%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	Normal Efficiency	Normal Efficiency
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The Radeon RX 460 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon RX 460 holds the technical lead. Priced at $35 (vs $50), it costs 30% less, resulting in a 45.4% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Quadro M2000	Radeon RX 460
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+45.4%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($50)	✅More affordable ($35)

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.

Quadro M2000 Benchmark Check

Radeon RX 460 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro M2000 and Radeon RX 460

Quadro M2000

The Quadro M2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 8 2016. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 796 MHz to 1163 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,026 points. Launch price was $437.75.

Radeon RX 460

The Radeon RX 460 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 8 2016. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1090 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,099 points. Launch price was $86.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro M2000 scores 4,026 and the Radeon RX 460 reaches 4,099 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M2000 is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Radeon RX 460 uses GCN 4.0, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 768 (Quadro M2000) vs 896 (Radeon RX 460). Raw compute: 1.786 TFLOPS (Quadro M2000) vs 2.15 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 460). Boost clocks: 1163 MHz vs 1200 MHz.

Feature	Quadro M2000	Radeon RX 460
G3D Mark Score	4,026	4,099+2%
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	GCN 4.0
Process Node	28 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	768	896+17%
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.786 TFLOPS	2.15 TFLOPS+20%
Boost Clock	1163 MHz	1200 MHz+3%
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	48	56+17%
L1 Cache	288 KB+29%	224 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro M2000	Radeon RX 460
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit.

Feature	Quadro M2000	Radeon RX 460
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12_1 (Quadro M2000) vs 12 (FL 12_0) (Radeon RX 460). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.

Feature	Quadro M2000	Radeon RX 460
DirectX	12_1	12 (FL 12_0)
Max Displays	4+33%	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 2nd Gen (Quadro M2000) vs VCE 3.4 (Radeon RX 460). Decoder: NVDEC 2nd Gen vs UVD 6.3.

Feature	Quadro M2000	Radeon RX 460
Encoder	NVENC 2nd Gen	VCE 3.4
Decoder	NVDEC 2nd Gen	UVD 6.3
Codecs	—	H.264,H.265/HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro M2000 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX 460's 75W — a 0% difference. The Radeon RX 460 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M2000) vs 350W (Radeon RX 460). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 167mm vs 170mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots.

Feature	Quadro M2000	Radeon RX 460
TDP	75W	75W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	None
Length	167mm	170mm
Height	—	111mm
Slots	1-50%	2
Perf/Watt	53.7	54.7+2%

💰

Value Analysis

The Quadro M2000 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the Radeon RX 460 launched at $110 and now averages $35. The Radeon RX 460 costs 30% less ($15 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 80.5 (Quadro M2000) vs 117.1 (Radeon RX 460) — the Radeon RX 460 offers 45.5% better value.