GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB vs GTX 460 768MB

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 460 768MB and GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 460 768MB
4.36

GTX 1050 3 GB outperforms GTX 460 768MB by a whopping 202% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking673386
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data12.05
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameno dataGP107
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release dateno data21 May 2018 (6 years ago)

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 cores336768
Core clock speed675 MHz1392 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1518 MHz
Number of transistorsno data3,300 million
Manufacturing process technologyno data14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data72.86
Floating-point processing powerno data2.332 TFLOPS
ROPsno data24
TMUsno data48

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data3 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz1752 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data84.1 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 Connectorsno data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX1112 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA-6.1

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD45
−189%
130−140
+189%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−200%
27−30
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−196%
80−85
+196%
Hitman 3 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−193%
85−90
+193%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−200%
27−30
+200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−181%
45−50
+181%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−195%
130−140
+195%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−200%
27−30
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−196%
80−85
+196%
Hitman 3 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−193%
85−90
+193%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−200%
27−30
+200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−181%
45−50
+181%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−194%
50−55
+194%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−195%
130−140
+195%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−200%
27−30
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−196%
80−85
+196%
Hitman 3 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−193%
85−90
+193%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−181%
45−50
+181%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−194%
50−55
+194%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−195%
130−140
+195%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
Hitman 3 9−10
−200%
27−30
+200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−196%
80−85
+196%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Hitman 3 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%

This is how GTX 460 768MB and GTX 1050 3 GB compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1050 3 GB is 189% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.36 13.18

GTX 1050 3 GB has a 202.3% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 460 768MB in performance tests.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 768MB
GeForce GTX 460 768MB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB
GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 94 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 460 768MB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 345 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.