GeForce GTX 460 SE vs Radeon R9 370
In this comparison between GeForce GTX 460 SE and Radeon R9 370 you will find out which graphics card performs better in today's games. Bear in mind that third-party versions may have more efficient cooling and higher clock speeds. This will increase cards' performance, though not by much. In addition to raw power you should also take into account the dimensions. Thicker models simply will not fit into a small mini-ITX case. The resolution of your monitor also affects the choice, since 4K gameplay requires a more powerful GPU. And don't overspend on the graphics card. Other parts of your build may also need to be upgraded, save some money for the CPU or power supply. For some people GeForce GTX 460 SE will be the best choice, for others Radeon R9 370 will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
GeForce GTX 460 SE
![](/static/img/graphics-card.jpg)
Radeon R9 370
![](/static/img/graphics-card.jpg)
Main Specs
GeForce GTX 460 SE | Radeon R9 370 | |
Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 110 Watt |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin & 6-pin | 1x 6-pin |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
- GeForce GTX 460 SE has 36% more power consumption, than Radeon R9 370.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and Radeon R9 370 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.
- Radeon R9 370 has 1 GB more memory, than GeForce GTX 460 SE.
- Both cards are used in Desktops.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is build with Fermi architecture, and Radeon R9 370 - with GCN 1.0.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GTX 460 SE is 375 MHz higher, than Radeon R9 370.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is manufactured by 40 nm process technology, and Radeon R9 370 - by 28 nm process technology.
- Radeon R9 370 is 213 mm longer, than GeForce GTX 460 SE.
- Memory clock speed of Radeon R9 370 is 3900 MHz higher, than GeForce GTX 460 SE.
Game benchmarks
high / 1080p | 9−10 | 35−40 |
ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 21−24 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 16−18 |
4K / 2160p | − | 10−11 |
low / 720p | 21−24 | 60−65 |
medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 40−45 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 241% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
high / 1080p | 16−18 | 55−60 |
ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 45−50 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 35−40 |
4K / 2160p | − | 18−20 |
low / 720p | 30−35 | 100−110 |
medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 60−65 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Battlefield 5 is 257% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 10% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
low / 768p | 160−170 | 250−260 |
medium / 768p | 130−140 | 220−230 |
ultra / 1080p | 65−70 | 180−190 |
QHD / 1440p | 40−45 | 110−120 |
4K / 2160p | 27−30 | 70−75 |
high / 768p | 100−110 | 210−220 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 96% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
low / 768p | 55−60 | 60−65 |
ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | − |
medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 55−60 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 15% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
low / 768p | 90−95 | 120−130 |
medium / 768p | 70−75 | 110−120 |
ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 100−110 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Dota 2 is 64% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
high / 1080p | 10−12 | 45−50 |
ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 40−45 |
QHD / 1440p | − | 27−30 |
4K / 2160p | 4−5 | 14−16 |
low / 720p | 24−27 | 80−85 |
medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 45−50 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Far Cry 5 is 291% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
high / 1080p | 18−20 | 60−65 |
ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 45−50 |
QHD / 1440p | − | 27−30 |
4K / 2160p | − | 27−30 |
low / 720p | 70−75 | 180−190 |
medium / 1080p | 30−35 | 110−120 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Fortnite is 200% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
high / 1080p | 16−18 | 60−65 |
ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 45−50 |
QHD / 1440p | 4−5 | 30−35 |
4K / 2160p | − | 24−27 |
low / 720p | 35−40 | 100−110 |
medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 65−70 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Forza Horizon 4 is 250% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
low / 768p | 65−70 | 140−150 |
medium / 768p | 55−60 | 120−130 |
high / 1080p | 18−20 | 70−75 |
ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 30−35 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 21−24 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Grand Theft Auto V is 144% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
high / 1080p | 6−7 | 24−27 |
ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 20−22 |
QHD / 1440p | − | 16−18 |
4K / 2160p | 1−2 | 8−9 |
low / 720p | 18−20 | 65−70 |
medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 30−35 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Metro Exodus is 287% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
low / 768p | 100−110 | 130−140 |
ultra / 1080p | 90−95 | − |
medium / 1080p | 95−100 | 120−130 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Minecraft is 28% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
high / 1080p | 18−20 | − |
ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 14−16 |
low / 720p | 40−45 | 100−110 |
medium / 1080p | 20−22 | 18−20 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 76% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
high / 1080p | 12−14 | 24−27 |
ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 16−18 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 10−11 |
4K / 2160p | − | 7−8 |
low / 720p | 18−20 | 65−70 |
medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 35−40 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 176% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
low / 768p | 35−40 | 130−140 |
medium / 768p | 21−24 | 85−90 |
high / 1080p | 12−14 | 45−50 |
ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 24−27 |
4K / 2160p | 7−8 | 16−18 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 264% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
low / 768p | 90−95 | 90−95 |
medium / 768p | 50−55 | 60−65 |
ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 50−55 |
high / 768p | 40−45 | 60−65 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in World of Tanks is 26% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. |
Full Specs
GeForce GTX 460 SE | Radeon R9 370 | |
Architecture | Fermi | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | GF104 | Trinidad |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Release date | 15 November 2010 | 5 May 2015 |
Pipelines | 288 | 1280 |
Core clock speed | 1300 MHz | 925 MHz |
Boost Clock | 975 MHz | |
Transistor count | 1,950 million | 2,800 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
Texture fill rate | 31.2 billion/sec | 78.00 |
Floating-point performance | 748.8 gflops | 2,496 gflops |
Length | 8.25" (210 mm) (21 cm) | 221 mm |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1700 MHz | 5600 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 108.8 GB/s | 179.2 GB/s |
DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |
Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
OpenGL | 4.1 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
CUDA | + | |
CUDA cores | 288 | |
Bus support | 16x PCI-E 2.0 | |
Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
SLI options | + | |
Multi monitor support | + | |
HDMI | + | |
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 48 Mh/s | 336 Mh/s |
Number of display connectors | 2 | |