GeForce4 MX 460 vs GeForce GT 230

Place in the ranking	1139	1509
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	no data
Power efficiency	0.78	no data
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Celsius (1999−2005)
GPU code name	G94B	NV17 A3
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	12 October 2009 (15 years ago)	6 February 2002 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$43.99	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	48	no data
Core clock speed	650 MHz	300 MHz
Number of transistors	505 million	29 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	15.60	1.200
Floating-point processing power	0.156 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	2
TMUs	24	4

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	AGP 4x
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR3	DDR
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	64 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	225 MHz
Memory bandwidth	57.6 GB/s	7.2 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

No outputs

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	8.0
Shader Model	4.0	no data
OpenGL	3.3	1.3
OpenCL	1.1	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.1	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GT 230 0.84
+8300%

GeForce4 MX 460 0.01

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GT 230 323
+7975%

GeForce4 MX 460 4

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.84	0.01
Recency	12 October 2009	6 February 2002
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	64 MB
Chip lithography	55 nm	150 nm

GT 230 has a 8300% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 172.7% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GT 230 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce4 MX 460 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.