GeForce GTX 460 SE vs Radeon R9 M280X
In this comparison between GeForce GTX 460 SE and Radeon R9 M280X 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 M280X will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
GeForce GTX 460 SE
Radeon R9 M280X is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Radeon R9 M280X 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 M280X here:
Main Specs
| GeForce GTX 460 SE | Radeon R9 M280X | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin & 6-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | Not Listed |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 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 M280X uses PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is used in Desktops, and Radeon R9 M280X - in Laptops.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is build with Fermi architecture, and Radeon R9 M280X - with GCN.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GTX 460 SE is 400 MHz higher, than Radeon R9 M280X.
- GeForce GTX 460 SE is manufactured by 40 nm process technology, and Radeon R9 M280X - by 28 nm process technology.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 9−10 | 2−3 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 1−2 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 140% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 7−8 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 5−6 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 30−35 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Battlefield 5 is 111% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | − | 30−35 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M280X 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 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 70−75 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M280X in Cyberpunk 2077 is 9% more, than GeForce GTX 460 SE. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 70−75 |
| medium / 768p | 70−75 | 50−55 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 27−30 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Dota 2 is 37% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−12 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 3−4 |
| 4K / 2160p | 4−5 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 24−27 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Far Cry 5 is 140% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | 10−12 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 5−6 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 70−75 | 50−55 |
| medium / 1080p | 30−35 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Fortnite is 61% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 6−7 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 35−40 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 9−10 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Forza Horizon 4 is 90% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 45−50 |
| medium / 768p | 55−60 | 40−45 |
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | 7−8 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 3−4 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Grand Theft Auto V is 52% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 2−3 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Metro Exodus is 120% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 100−110 | 80−85 |
| ultra / 1080p | 90−95 | 70−75 |
| medium / 1080p | 95−100 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Minecraft is 27% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 40−45 | 27−30 |
| medium / 1080p | 20−22 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 44% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 6−7 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | − |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 85% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 35−40 | 16−18 |
| medium / 768p | 21−24 | 10−12 |
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 6−7 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | 7−8 | 2−3 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 112% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 70−75 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 16−18 |
| high / 768p | 40−45 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 460 SE in World of Tanks is 35% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
Full Specs
| GeForce GTX 460 SE | Radeon R9 M280X | |
| Architecture | Fermi | GCN |
| Code name | GF104 | Saturn XT |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 November 2010 | 1 February 2015 |
| Pipelines | 288 | 896 |
| Core clock speed | 1300 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Transistor count | 1,950 million | 2,080 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 31.2 billion/sec | 61.60 |
| Floating-point performance | 748.8 gflops | 1,792 gflops |
| Length | 8.25" (210 mm) (21 cm) | |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 1700 MHz | |
| Memory bandwidth | 108.8 GB/s | 96 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.1 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | Not Listed |
| Vulkan | N/A | |
| CUDA | + | |
| FreeSync | + | |
| CUDA cores | 288 | |
| Bus support | 16x PCI-E 2.0 | Not Listed |
| 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 | |
| Laptop size | large | |
| HD3D | + | |
| PowerTune | + | |
| DualGraphics | + | |
| ZeroCore | + | |
| Switchable graphics | + | |
| Mantle | + | |
| Number of display connectors | 2 | |
| Check Price |