NVIDIA
GeForce GTX 460 192bit vs Intel Arc A730M
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
Intel
Intel Arc A730M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GTX 460 192bit and Intel Arc A730M across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Intel Arc A730M outperforms GTX 460 192bit by ~12% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+12%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 15, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce GTX 460 192bit (~4%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GTX 460 192bit
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: Not supported
Reasons to consider Intel Arc A730M
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 · XeSS
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIA
IntelPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
4348
90100
10060
1780
Graphics card ranking
Positions 201–206of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GTX 460 192bit
59 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
43
48Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
37
41Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
35
39Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
90
100Better
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
58Better
56
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Device class
DirectX
OpenGL
USB Type-C
Vulkan—
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
Memory type
Power connector
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory bus
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Max monitors
Max resolution
Recommended PSU
Length
Thickness
Architecture
Transistor count
Die size
Power consumptionBetter
Shader units / cores
Memory cache
Process nodeBetter
Release date
Compute API—
Launch price——
DisplayPort
Upscaling
HDMI
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GTX 460 192bit and Intel Arc A730M across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GTX 460 192bitIntel Arc A730M
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
218 FPS
207 FPS
1080p Ultra
153 FPS
145 FPS
1440p Ultra
86 FPS
113 FPS
4K Ultra
31 FPS
46 FPS
Counter-Strike 2GTX 460 192bit218 FPSIntel Arc A730M207 FPSGTX 460 192bit153 FPSIntel Arc A730M145 FPSGTX 460 192bit86 FPSIntel Arc A730M113 FPSGTX 460 192bit31 FPSIntel Arc A730M46 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077GTX 460 192bit141 FPSIntel Arc A730M134 FPSGTX 460 192bit121 FPSIntel Arc A730M115 FPSGTX 460 192bit62 FPSIntel Arc A730M82 FPSGTX 460 192bit21 FPSIntel Arc A730M31 FPS
Forza Horizon 5GTX 460 192bit178 FPSIntel Arc A730M168 FPSGTX 460 192bit115 FPSIntel Arc A730M109 FPSGTX 460 192bit77 FPSIntel Arc A730M102 FPSGTX 460 192bit46 FPSIntel Arc A730M68 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyGTX 460 192bit115 FPSIntel Arc A730M109 FPSGTX 460 192bit96 FPSIntel Arc A730M91 FPSGTX 460 192bit56 FPSIntel Arc A730M73 FPSGTX 460 192bit21 FPSIntel Arc A730M31 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100434811%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100365643%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100365745%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 1001780130%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1009010011%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100316267%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100336160%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100365745%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100296577%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100355849%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX11.012.2
Vulkan—1.4
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingNot supportedXeSS
Compute API—OpenCL 3.0
Architecture and release
ArchitectureNot publicly specifiedXe HPG (Alchemist)
Process node40 nm6 nmBetter
Release date20102022
Device classDesktopMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor countNot publicly specified21700 million
Die sizeNot publicly specified406 mm²
Shader units / coresNot publicly specified3072
Base clock700 MHz1100 MHzBetter
Boost clock700 MHz2050 MHzBetter
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 2x16PCIe 4.0 x16
LengthVaries by boardOEM dependent
ThicknessVaries by boardIGP
Recommended PSUVaries by boardOEM dependent
Power connector6+6 pinIntegrated laptop power
Display outputs and limits
HDMIBoard dependentOEM dependent
DisplayPortBoard dependentOEM dependent
USB Type-CNoOEM dependent
Max monitorsVaries by boardOEM dependent
Max resolutionVaries by boardDepends on host system
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM768 MB GDDR5Better12 GB GDDR6
Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Memory bus192 bit192 bit
TFLOPS0.90712.6Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 66
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (3)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (5)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GTX 460 192bit or Intel Arc A730M?+
GTX 460 192bit has the higher overall gaming score, while GTX 460 192bit offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GTX 460 192bit is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GTX 460 192bit is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GTX 460 192bit offers more overall performance, while GTX 460 192bit offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GTX 460 192bit is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GTX 460 192bit is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GTX 460 192bit leads in combined 1440p performance. GTX 460 192bit can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GTX 460 192bit is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
Intel Arc A730M is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
Intel Arc A730M is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GTX 460 192bit if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.