GeForce GTX 460 SE vs Iris Graphics 6100
When comparing GeForce GTX 460 SE and Iris Graphics 6100, we look primarily at benchmarks and game tests. But it is not only about the numbers. Often you can find third-party models with higher clock speeds, better cooling, or a customizable RGB lighting. Not all of them will have all the features you need. Another thing to consider is the port selection. Most graphics cards have at least one DisplayPort and HDMI interface, but some monitors require DVI. Before you buy, check the TDP of the graphics card - this characteristic will help you estimate the consumption of the graphics card. You may even have to upgrade your PSU to meet its requirements. An important factor when choosing between GeForce GTX 460 SE and Iris Graphics 6100 is the price. Does the additional cost justify the performance hit? Our comparison should help you make the right decision.
GeForce GTX 460 SE
Iris Graphics 6100 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Iris Graphics 6100 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 Iris Graphics 6100 here:
Main Specs
GeForce GTX 460 SE | Iris Graphics 6100 | |
Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 15 Watt |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x1 |
Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin & 6-pin | None |
Memory type | GDDR5 | System Shared |
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | |
Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI | No outputs |
Check Price |
- GeForce GTX 460 SE has 900% more power consumption, than Iris Graphics 6100.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and Iris Graphics 6100 uses PCIe 2.0 x1 interface.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is used in Desktops, and Iris Graphics 6100 - in Laptops.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is build with Fermi architecture, and Iris Graphics 6100 - with Gen. 8 Broadwell.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GTX 460 SE is 1000 MHz higher, than Iris Graphics 6100.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is manufactured by 40 nm process technology, and Iris Graphics 6100 - by 14 nm process technology.
Game benchmarks
high / 1080p | 9−10 | 4−5 |
ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 3−4 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 21−24 | 12−14 |
medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 5−6 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 100% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
high / 1080p | 16−18 | − |
ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 7−8 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 30−35 | 18−20 |
medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 8−9 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Battlefield 5 is 81% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
low / 768p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
high / 1080p | − | 45−50 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
GeForce GTX 460 SE and Iris Graphics 6100 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
low / 768p | 160−170 | 110−120 |
medium / 768p | 130−140 | 85−90 |
ultra / 1080p | 65−70 | 40−45 |
QHD / 1440p | 40−45 | 24−27 |
4K / 2160p | 27−30 | − |
high / 768p | 100−110 | 60−65 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 56% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
low / 768p | 55−60 | 55−60 |
ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 14−16 |
medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Cyberpunk 2077 is 7% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
low / 768p | 90−95 | 70−75 |
medium / 768p | 70−75 | 45−50 |
ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 24−27 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Dota 2 is 45% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
high / 1080p | 10−12 | 6−7 |
ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 5−6 |
4K / 2160p | 4−5 | 3−4 |
low / 720p | 24−27 | 12−14 |
medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 6−7 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Far Cry 5 is 71% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
high / 1080p | 18−20 | 12−14 |
ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 8−9 |
low / 720p | 70−75 | 50−55 |
medium / 1080p | 30−35 | 14−16 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Fortnite is 54% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
high / 1080p | 16−18 | 9−10 |
ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 9−10 |
QHD / 1440p | 4−5 | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 35−40 | 18−20 |
medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 10−11 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Forza Horizon 4 is 83% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
low / 768p | 65−70 | 40−45 |
medium / 768p | 55−60 | 35−40 |
high / 1080p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 5−6 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Grand Theft Auto V is 65% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
high / 1080p | 6−7 | 3−4 |
ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 2−3 |
4K / 2160p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 5−6 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Metro Exodus is 80% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
low / 768p | 100−110 | 90−95 |
high / 1080p | − | 80−85 |
ultra / 1080p | 90−95 | 70−75 |
medium / 1080p | 95−100 | − |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Minecraft is 19% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
high / 1080p | 18−20 | 16−18 |
ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 14−16 |
low / 720p | 40−45 | 24−27 |
medium / 1080p | 20−22 | 16−18 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 33% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
high / 1080p | 12−14 | − |
ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 7−8 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
medium / 1080p | 12−14 | − |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 62% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
low / 768p | 35−40 | 18−20 |
medium / 768p | 21−24 | 12−14 |
high / 1080p | 12−14 | 7−8 |
ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 5−6 |
4K / 2160p | 7−8 | − |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 81% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. | ||
low / 768p | 90−95 | 80−85 |
medium / 768p | 50−55 | 35−40 |
ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 14−16 |
high / 768p | 40−45 | 30−35 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in World of Tanks is 29% more, than Iris Graphics 6100. |
Full Specs
GeForce GTX 460 SE | Iris Graphics 6100 | |
Architecture | Fermi | Gen. 8 Broadwell |
Code name | GF104 | Broadwell GT3 |
Type | Desktop | Laptop |
Release date | 15 November 2010 | 5 January 2015 |
Pipelines | 288 | 48 |
Core clock speed | 1300 MHz | 300 MHz |
Boost Clock | 1100 MHz | |
Transistor count | 1,950 million | 189 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 14 nm |
Texture fill rate | 31.2 billion/sec | 52.80 |
Floating-point performance | 748.8 gflops | |
Length | 8.25" (210 mm) (21 cm) | |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64/128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1700 MHz | |
Memory bandwidth | 108.8 GB/s | |
Shared memory | + | |
DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |
Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
OpenGL | 4.1 | 4.4 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.0 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.1.80 |
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 | |
Quick Sync | + | |
Number of display connectors | 2 | |
Check Price |
Similar compares
- GeForce GTX 460 SE vs GeForce GTX 470M
- GeForce GTX 460 SE vs Quadro M600M
- Iris Graphics 6100 vs GeForce GTX 470M
- Iris Graphics 6100 vs Quadro M600M
- GeForce GTX 460 SE vs Radeon R6 M340DX
- GeForce GTX 460 SE vs Radeon R9 M365X
- Iris Graphics 6100 vs Radeon R6 M340DX
- Iris Graphics 6100 vs Radeon R9 M365X