Quadro T500 Mobile vs Radeon Pro 460

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 460 and Quadro T500 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Pro 460
2016
4 GB GDDR5, 35 Watt
8.98

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking489484
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency17.7034.54
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameBaffinTU117
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date30 October 2016 (8 years ago)2 December 2020 (4 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 cores1024896
Core clock speed850 MHz1365 MHz
Boost clock speed907 MHz1695 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate58.0594.92
Floating-point processing power1.858 TFLOPS3.037 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs6456

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).

Laptop sizelargemedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1270 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth81.28 GB/s80 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2
CUDA-7.5

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.

Pro 460 8.98
T500 Mobile 9.01
+0.3%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Pro 460 6749
T500 Mobile 7996
+18.5%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Pro 460 4584
+8.5%
T500 Mobile 4225

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Pro 460 27064
+15.4%
T500 Mobile 23453

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 HD38
+5.6%
36
−5.6%
1440p14−16
−7.1%
15
+7.1%
4K16−18
−6.3%
17
+6.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Elden Ring 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+125%
8
−125%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+200%
6
−200%
Dota 2 30−35
−181%
90
+181%
Elden Ring 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+35.7%
28
−35.7%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+3.2%
31
−3.2%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
−1.4%
70−75
+1.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−3.7%
28
+3.7%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
World of Tanks 130−140
−0.8%
130−140
+0.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+260%
5
−260%
Dota 2 30−35
−134%
75
+134%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+40.7%
27
−40.7%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
−1.4%
70−75
+1.4%
Valorant 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Elden Ring 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−12
−18.2%
13
+18.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+7.5%
40−45
−7.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
World of Tanks 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Valorant 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Elden Ring 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+35.7%
14
−35.7%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
−47.4%
28
+47.4%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Elden Ring 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
High Preset

Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

This is how Pro 460 and T500 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • Pro 460 is 6% faster in 1080p
  • T500 Mobile is 7% faster in 1440p
  • T500 Mobile is 6% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 460 is 260% faster.
  • in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the T500 Mobile is 181% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro 460 is ahead in 7 tests (12%)
  • T500 Mobile is ahead in 10 tests (18%)
  • there's a draw in 40 tests (70%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.98 9.01
Recency 30 October 2016 2 December 2020
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 18 Watt

Pro 460 has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

T500 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 0.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 94.4% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon Pro 460 and Quadro T500 Mobile.


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.


AMD Radeon Pro 460
Radeon Pro 460
NVIDIA Quadro T500 Mobile
Quadro T500 Mobile

Other comparisons

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.


4 35 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 460 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 107 votes

Rate Quadro T500 Mobile 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.