GeForce FX 5200 vs Radeon RX 460

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 460 and GeForce FX 5200, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX 460
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
10.42
+52000%

RX 460 outperforms FX 5200 by a whopping 52000% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4391500
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.12no data
Power efficiency9.76no data
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Celsius (1999−2005)
GPU code nameBaffinNV18 C1
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date8 August 2016 (8 years ago)6 March 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86 $69.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores896no data
Core clock speed1090 MHz250 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,000 million29 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Wattno data
Texture fill rate67.201.000
Floating-point processing power2.15 TFLOPSno data
ROPs162
TMUs564

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8AGP 8x
Length170 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount2 GB128 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz200 MHz
Memory bandwidth112.0 GB/s6.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)8.0
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.61.3
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

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.

RX 460 10.42
+52000%
FX 5200 0.02

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.

RX 460 4101
+58486%
FX 5200 7

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 HD42-0−1
1440p50-0−1
4K20-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.05no data
1440p1.72no data
4K4.30no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 18 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27 0−1
Battlefield 5 40−45 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 18−20 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22 0−1
Far Cry 5 40 0−1
Fortnite 116 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 57 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 24−27 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 36 0−1
Valorant 90−95 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27 0−1
Battlefield 5 40−45 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 18−20 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22 0−1
Dota 2 70−75 0−1
Far Cry 5 37 0−1
Fortnite 39 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 54 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 24−27 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 35 0−1
Metro Exodus 21 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 28 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 37 0−1
Valorant 90−95 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 10 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22 0−1
Dota 2 70−75 0−1
Far Cry 5 34 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 41 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 24−27 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23 0−1
Valorant 90−95 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 31 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 0−1
Metro Exodus 10−12 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55 0−1
Valorant 110−120 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1
Far Cry 5 21−24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 24−27 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 18−20 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 8−9 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 4−5 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24 0−1
Metro Exodus 6−7 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12 0−1
Valorant 50−55 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Dota 2 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 11 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 16−18 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 8−9 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.42 0.02
Recency 8 August 2016 6 March 2003
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 150 nm

RX 460 has a 52000% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 971.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 460 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5200 in performance tests.

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 RX 460
Radeon RX 460
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200
GeForce FX 5200

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.


3.8 1060 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 257 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX 460 or GeForce FX 5200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.