GeForce GTX 295 vs Radeon RX 460

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 460 and GeForce GTX 295, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX 460
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
10.63
+240%

RX 460 outperforms GTX 295 by a whopping 240% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking432751
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.120.12
Power efficiency9.880.75
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameBaffinGT200B
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date8 August 2016 (8 years ago)8 January 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86 $500

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 460 has 833% better value for money than GTX 295.

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 cores896480
CUDA cores per GPUno data240
Core clock speed1090 MHz576 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,000 million1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt289 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate67.2046.08
Floating-point processing power2.15 TFLOPS0.5962 TFLOPS
ROPs1628
TMUs5680

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 x8PCIe 2.0 x16
Length170 mm267 mm
Heightno data4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
SLI options-+

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB1792 MB
Standard memory config per GPUno data896 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit896 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz999 MHz
Memory bandwidth112.0 GB/s223.8 GB/s
Memory interface width per GPUno data448 Bit
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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortTwo Dual Link DVIHDMI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)no data128bit

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-+

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.

RX 460 10.63
+240%
GTX 295 3.13

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 4102
+240%
GTX 295 1206

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 HD40
+300%
10−12
−300%
1440p28
+250%
8−9
−250%
4K19
+280%
5−6
−280%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.1550.00
1440p3.0762.50
4K4.53100.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 34
+240%
10−11
−240%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+267%
9−10
−267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+294%
18−20
−294%
Hitman 3 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+263%
16−18
−263%
Metro Exodus 44
+267%
12−14
−267%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+261%
18−20
−261%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 54
+286%
14−16
−286%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Battlefield 5 22
+267%
6−7
−267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%
Far Cry New Dawn 31
+244%
9−10
−244%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+294%
18−20
−294%
Hitman 3 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+263%
16−18
−263%
Metro Exodus 35
+250%
10−11
−250%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+250%
8−9
−250%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+261%
18−20
−261%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 17
+240%
5−6
−240%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%
Forza Horizon 4 41
+242%
12−14
−242%
Hitman 3 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 36
+260%
10−11
−260%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
+283%
6−7
−283%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+261%
18−20
−261%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+250%
14−16
−250%
Hitman 3 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 25
+257%
7−8
−257%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+272%
18−20
−272%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 13
+333%
3−4
−333%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Hitman 3 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+292%
12−14
−292%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+300%
3−4
−300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%

This is how RX 460 and GTX 295 compete in popular games:

  • RX 460 is 300% faster in 1080p
  • RX 460 is 250% faster in 1440p
  • RX 460 is 280% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.63 3.13
Recency 8 August 2016 8 January 2009
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1792 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 289 Watt

RX 460 has a 239.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 14.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 285.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 460 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 295 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.


AMD Radeon RX 460
Radeon RX 460
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
GeForce GTX 295

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.


3.8 1027 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 80 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 295 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.