GeForce GTX 460 SE vs Radeon R9 M275
Find out if it is worth upgrading your current GPU setup by comparing GeForce GTX 460 SE and Radeon R9 M275. Here you can take a closer look at graphics cards specs, such as core clock speed, memory type and size, display connectors, etc. The price, overall benchmark and gaming performances are usually defining factors when it comes to choosing between GeForce GTX 460 SE and Radeon R9 M275. Make sure that the graphics card has compatible dimensions and will properly fit in your new or current computer case. Also these graphics cards may have different system power recommendations, so take that into consideration and upgrade your PSU if necessary.
GeForce GTX 460 SE
Radeon R9 M275 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Radeon R9 M275 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 M275 here:
Main Specs
| GeForce GTX 460 SE | Radeon R9 M275 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin & 6-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI | No outputs |
| Check Price |
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and Radeon R9 M275 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.
- Radeon R9 M275 has 3 GB more memory, than GeForce GTX 460 SE.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is used in Desktops, and Radeon R9 M275 - in Laptops.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is build with Fermi architecture, and Radeon R9 M275 - with GCN.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GTX 460 SE is 375 MHz higher, than Radeon R9 M275.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is manufactured by 40 nm process technology, and Radeon R9 M275 - by 28 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Radeon R9 M275 is 2800 MHz higher, than GeForce GTX 460 SE.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 12−14 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 112% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 5−6 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 30−35 | 16−18 |
| medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 5−6 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Battlefield 5 is 137% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | − | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 50−55 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M275 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 10% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
| low / 768p | 160−170 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 130−140 | 90−95 |
| ultra / 1080p | 65−70 | 40−45 |
| QHD / 1440p | 40−45 | 24−27 |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | 18−20 |
| high / 768p | 100−110 | 65−70 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 50% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M275 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 2% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 70−75 |
| medium / 768p | 70−75 | 50−55 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 24−27 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Dota 2 is 40% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−12 | 1−2 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 24−27 | 10−12 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Far Cry 5 is 220% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | 9−10 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 5−6 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 70−75 | 50−55 |
| medium / 1080p | 30−35 | 12−14 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Fortnite is 70% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 6−7 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 35−40 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Forza Horizon 4 is 144% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 45−50 |
| medium / 768p | 55−60 | − |
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | 7−8 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | − | 35−40 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Grand Theft Auto V is 63% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 1−2 |
| 4K / 2160p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 7−8 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Metro Exodus is 125% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| 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 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 40−45 | 24−27 |
| medium / 1080p | 20−22 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 41% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| 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 Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 35−40 | 16−18 |
| medium / 768p | 21−24 | 12−14 |
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 6−7 |
| 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 100% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 85−90 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 14−16 |
| high / 768p | 40−45 | 30−33 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in World of Tanks is 26% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
Full Specs
| GeForce GTX 460 SE | Radeon R9 M275 | |
| Architecture | Fermi | GCN |
| Code name | GF104 | Venus |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 November 2010 | 1 August 2014 |
| Pipelines | 288 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 1300 MHz | 925 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 925 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 1,950 million | 1,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 31.2 billion/sec | 37.00 |
| Floating-point performance | 748.8 gflops | 1,184 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 | 64 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| 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 | 122 Mh/s |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Number of display connectors | 2 | |
| Check Price |