Join Us On Facebook

Compare any two graphics cards:
VS

GeForce GTX 460 vs Radeon HD 5770

Intro

The GeForce GTX 460 comes with a core clock speed of 675 MHz and a GDDR5 memory frequency of 900 MHz. It also makes use of a 192-bit memory bus, and uses a 40 nm design. It is comprised of 336 SPUs, 56 Texture Address Units, and 24 ROPs.

Compare that to the Radeon HD 5770, which features a core clock frequency of 850 MHz and a GDDR5 memory frequency of 1200 MHz. It also makes use of a 128-bit bus, and uses a 40 nm design. It is comprised of 800(160x5) SPUs, 40 Texture Address Units, and 16 ROPs.

Avatar

Settings: Ultra High Quality
AA: 8x
AF: none
Resolution: 1920x1200
Test Machine: Tom's Hardware Test Machine (Source)
GeForce GTX 460 48 FPS
Radeon HD 5770 37 FPS
Difference: 11 FPS (30%)

Battlefield Bad Company 2

Settings: High Quality
AA: 4x
AF: 8x
Resolution: 1920x1200
Test Machine: Tom's Hardware Test Machine (Source)
GeForce GTX 460 35 FPS
Radeon HD 5770 30 FPS
Difference: 5 FPS (17%)

Left4Dead 2

Settings: Very High
AA: 8x
AF: 16x
Resolution: 1920x1200
Test Machine: Tom's Hardware Test Machine (Source)
GeForce GTX 460 77 FPS
Radeon HD 5770 70 FPS
Difference: 7 FPS (10%)

Mass Effect 2

Settings: Maximum Quality
AA: none
AF: 8x
Resolution: 1920x1200
Test Machine: Tom's Hardware Test Machine (Source)
GeForce GTX 460 91 FPS
Radeon HD 5770 87 FPS
Difference: 4 FPS (5%)

Supreme Commander 2

Settings: High
AA: 8x
AF: 16x
Resolution: 1920x1200
Test Machine: Tom's Hardware Test Machine (Source)
GeForce GTX 460 75 FPS
Radeon HD 5770 62 FPS
Difference: 13 FPS (21%)

GeForce GTX 460 wins

(Based entirely on the benchmarks listed above)

When combining all game benchmark scores on this page together, the GeForce GTX 460 wins overall, by 40 FPS. Please note that we do not have the results of every benchmark ever done for these cards, so the results may differ wildly in different games.

GeForce GTX 460 326 FPS
Radeon HD 5770 286 FPS
Difference: 40 FPS (14%)

Power Usage and Theoretical Benchmarks

Power Consumption (Max TDP)

Radeon HD 5770 108 Watts
GeForce GTX 460 150 Watts
Difference: 42 Watts (39%)

Memory Bandwidth

The GeForce GTX 460 should theoretically perform a bit faster than the Radeon HD 5770 in general. (explain)

GeForce GTX 460 86400 MB/sec
Radeon HD 5770 76800 MB/sec
Difference: 9600 (13%)

Texel Rate

The GeForce GTX 460 is a bit (approximately 11%) faster with regards to AF than the Radeon HD 5770. (explain)

GeForce GTX 460 37800 Mtexels/sec
Radeon HD 5770 34000 Mtexels/sec
Difference: 3800 (11%)

Pixel Rate

If running with a high screen resolution is important to you, then the GeForce GTX 460 is a better choice, though not by far. (explain)

GeForce GTX 460 16200 Mpixels/sec
Radeon HD 5770 13600 Mpixels/sec
Difference: 2600 (19%)

Please note that the above 'benchmarks' are all just theoretical - the results were calculated based on the card's specifications, and real-world performance may (and probably will) vary at least a bit.

Price Comparison

GeForce GTX 460

Amazon.com

Radeon HD 5770

Amazon.com

Please note that the price comparisons are based on search keywords - sometimes it might show cards with very similar names that are not exactly the same as the one chosen in the comparison. We do try to filter out the wrong results as best we can, though.

Specifications

Model GeForce GTX 460 Radeon HD 5770
Manufacturer nVidia AMD
Year July 2010 October 13, 2009
Code Name GF104 Juniper XT
Fab Process 40 nm 40 nm
Bus PCIe x16 PCIe 2.1 x16
Memory 768 MB 1024 MB
Core Speed 675 MHz 850 MHz
Shader Speed 1350 MHz (N/A) MHz
Memory Speed 900 MHz (3600 MHz effective) 1200 MHz (4800 MHz effective)
Unified Shaders 336 800(160x5)
Texture Mapping Units 56 40
Render Output Units 24 16
Bus Type GDDR5 GDDR5
Bus Width 192-bit 128-bit
DirectX Version DirectX 11 DirectX 11
OpenGL Version OpenGL 4.1 OpenGL 3.2
Power (Max TDP) 150 watts 108 watts
Shader Model 5.0 5.0
Bandwidth 86400 MB/sec 76800 MB/sec
Texel Rate 37800 Mtexels/sec 34000 Mtexels/sec
Pixel Rate 16200 Mpixels/sec 13600 Mpixels/sec

Memory Bandwidth: Bandwidth is the maximum amount of data (in units of MB per second) that can be moved over the external memory interface within a second. The number is worked out by multiplying the interface width by the speed of its memory. In the case of DDR memory, it should be multiplied by 2 again. If it uses DDR5, multiply by 4 instead. The higher the memory bandwidth, the faster the card will be in general. It especially helps with anti-aliasing, High Dynamic Range and higher screen resolutions.

Texel Rate: Texel rate is the maximum number of texture map elements (texels) that are processed in one second. This is worked out by multiplying the total number of texture units by the core clock speed of the chip. The better this number, the better the card will be at handling texture filtering (anisotropic filtering - AF). It is measured in millions of texels applied in a second.

Pixel Rate: Pixel rate is the maximum amount of pixels that the graphics card can possibly write to the local memory per second - measured in millions of pixels per second. The figure is calculated by multiplying the number of ROPs by the the core clock speed. ROPs (Raster Operations Pipelines - also sometimes called Render Output Units) are responsible for drawing the pixels (image) on the screen. The actual pixel fill rate is also dependant on lots of other factors, most notably the memory bandwidth - the lower the memory bandwidth is, the lower the potential to reach the maximum fill rate.

Comments

One Response to “GeForce GTX 460 vs Radeon HD 5770”
[...] intensive games (eg Crysis) but realistically speaking it should do you very well. Comparison: http://www.hwcompare.com/8140/geforc...adeon-hd-5770/ Note that the 5770 runs at a smooth 30fps @ 1920x1200 on Battlefield Bad Company 2 on High with [...]

Your email address will not be published.


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree