Radeon RX 460 vs Quadro M2000

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	Radeon RX 460	Quadro M2000
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+1.8%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.8%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))
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	Radeon RX 460	Quadro M2000
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+45.4%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($35)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($50)

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.

Radeon RX 460 Benchmark Check

Quadro M2000 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

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

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.

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.

⚡

Graphics Performance

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

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

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

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

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

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

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

🖥️

Display & API Support

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

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

🎬

Media & Encoding

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

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

🔌

Power & Dimensions

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

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

💰

Value Analysis

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