GeForce GTX 460 SE vs Radeon R9 M370X
If you are going to buy a new graphics card and are choosing between GeForce GTX 460 SE and Radeon R9 M370X, there are a couple of things to consider. Cards with more VRAM in general perform better and allow you to play on higher graphics settings. Size also makes a difference. A model with a large heatsink can occupy up to three expansion slots on a motherboard. Be sure you have enough room in your PC case. When comparing GPUs with different architectures, more processing cores and even higher TFLOPS will not always translate to better performance. To help you decide which GPU you need, we have measured frame rates in a number of popular games. For more on how the GeForce GTX 460 SE stacks up against Radeon R9 M370X, check out specs charts below.
GeForce GTX 460 SE
Radeon R9 M370X is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Radeon R9 M370X is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with Radeon R9 M370X here:
Main Specs
| GeForce GTX 460 SE | Radeon R9 M370X | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin & 6-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI | |
| Check Price |
- Radeon R9 M370X has 1 GB more memory, than GeForce GTX 460 SE.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is used in Desktops, and Radeon R9 M370X - in Laptops.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is build with Fermi architecture, and Radeon R9 M370X - with GCN 1.0.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GTX 460 SE is 500 MHz higher, than Radeon R9 M370X.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is manufactured by 40 nm process technology, and Radeon R9 M370X - by 28 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Radeon R9 M370X is 2800 MHz higher, than GeForce GTX 460 SE.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 9−10 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 1−2 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 100% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 8−9 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 6−7 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 30−35 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 9−10 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Battlefield 5 is 72% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| high / 1080p | − | 40−45 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| GeForce GTX 460 SE and Radeon R9 M370X have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 160−170 | 120−130 |
| medium / 768p | 130−140 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 65−70 | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 40−45 | 24−27 |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | − |
| high / 768p | 100−110 | 75−80 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 33% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 70−75 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M370X in Cyberpunk 2077 is 4% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 70−75 | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Dota 2 is 27% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−12 | 4−5 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | 4−5 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 24−27 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Far Cry 5 is 100% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 4−5 |
| low / 720p | 70−75 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 30−35 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Fortnite is 36% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 8−9 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 35−40 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 10−11 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Forza Horizon 4 is 83% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 50−55 |
| medium / 768p | 55−60 | − |
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | − | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Grand Theft Auto V is 40% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 2−3 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 9−10 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Metro Exodus is 120% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 100−110 | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | − | 70−75 |
| ultra / 1080p | 90−95 | − |
| medium / 1080p | 95−100 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Minecraft is 20% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 40−45 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 20−22 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 30% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 7−8 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 85% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 35−40 | 20−22 |
| medium / 768p | 21−24 | 12−14 |
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 7−8 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 5−6 |
| 4K / 2160p | 7−8 | 1−2 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 88% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 40−45 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 18−20 |
| high / 768p | 40−45 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in World of Tanks is 26% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
Full Specs
| GeForce GTX 460 SE | Radeon R9 M370X | |
| Architecture | Fermi | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | GF104 | Cape Verde |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 November 2010 | 19 May 2015 |
| Pipelines | 288 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 1300 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Transistor count | 1,950 million | 1500 Million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 31.2 billion/sec | |
| Floating-point performance | 748.8 gflops | |
| Length | 8.25" (210 mm) (21 cm) | |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1700 MHz | 4500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 108.8 GB/s | |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | DirectX 12 (FL 11_1), Shader 5.0 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.1 | |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
| Vulkan | N/A | |
| 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 | 125 Mh/s |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Number of display connectors | 2 | |
| Check Price |