Why I bought a GTX 460 SE for $50

[H0R53]

A lot of you are aware that the GTX 4 series isn't the latest and greatest by nVidia. You also may be aware that the Fermi architecture is basically a nuclear reactor when it comes to thermal output.

 

I currently have a GTX 1050Ti with a custom BIOS I made to keep my clock speed high (around 2GHz). It stays around 60C under load and consumes about 100W of power. My media center (link in signature) uses an old GTX 550Ti.

 

While the 550Ti has a higher clock speed (mine's at about 1050Mhz) and lower power consumption, the GTX 460 SE is still better. Even the 768MB version of the GTX 460 is better. The PSU 'requirement' for the 550Ti and the 460 are about the same (400W), the 460 in fact does use more power.

 

I've run a GTX 1050Ti SSC on a 150W PSU. The 550Ti is currently running off of a 250W PSU. 90% of the time the PSU recommendations are actually just a suggestion and if you have a good power supply you can often exceed its rated limit without much of a problem.

 

I had an OEM GTX 460SE from a Dell system (part number GR23P) that had a blower style cooler on it - I loved that thing. I sold it in a QX6850 system for a total of $300. The GTX 460 is a very good card, if it had 1GB more vRAM it would be better.

 

My old GTX 460SE was paired with a Xeon X5460 and 8GB of DDR2 800Mhz, and I could happily play Fallout 4 on Low to Medium settings without a problem. Unfortunately the part of games that suffer the most is texture quality due to the small amount of vRAM - my old as hell GT 710 had 2GB of vRAM and it could hold textures better.

 

The GTX 550Ti and the GTX 460 both have 1GB of vRAM. So memory is still an issue. However, that's not why I bought one. I bought one because it's a great card. I know most people here wouldn't pay more than $50 for one, but the GR23P I also paid $50 for. And to me it's worth it.

 

The GTX 460SE is the lower clocked variant of the GTX 460, and only requires one 6-pin - which is why I bought it. Using MSI Afterburner you can overclock the card to the stock clock of the regular GTX 460 and still have a lower power consumption than the original card along with the same performance.

 

Because of this, the GTX 460SE is worth far more than the GTX 460 Regular Edition. The single 6-pin requirement also means I can put it inside my media PC, even on 250W. The 550Ti I have now is going inside another PC I'm going to sell, so the 460 is a necessity at this point anyways.

 

Here's the comparison sheet from nVidia and the 550Ti vs GTX 460SE.

 

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-550-Ti-vs-Nvidia-GTX-460-SE/3161vsm7703

[Frankenburger]

But...why not a GT 1030 for $70? Or a second hand 750Ti for $30-40?

[H0R53]

2 minutes ago, Frankenburger said:

But...why not a GT 1030 for $70? Or a second hand 750Ti for $30-50?

The GTX 460 is better than the GT 1030 by a million miles, and the 750Ti is actually in short stock in the markets I use (Amazon), driving up the price to around $75.

[Frankenburger]

17 minutes ago, H0R53 said:

The GTX 460 is better than the GT 1030 by a million miles, and the 750Ti is actually in short stock in the markets I use (Amazon), driving up the price to around $75.

Ehm...you're kidding, right? The GT 1030 is faster than a GTX 750, and nearly matches a 750 Ti in most benchmarks. So, no, a GTX 460 is not better than a GT 1030.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gt-1030-2gb,5110.html

 

Also, Ebay is loaded with 750 Ti's for $30.

[H0R53]

Just now, Frankenburger said:

Ehm...you're kidding, right? The GT 1030 is on par with a GTX 750. So, no, a GTX 460 is not better than a GT 1030.

 

Also, Ebay is loaded with 750 Ti's for $30.

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-460-vs-Nvidia-GT-1030/2167vsm283726

 

For gaming, the GTX 460 is way better. The GT 1030 is also louder IME.

 

The 460 was $50, man, the 1030 is like 80. So in terms of price/performance, the 460 is better.

 

The 460 also has more CUDA cores.

 

I don't use eBay, 9/10 times I've shopped there I've been scammed, so I'm not wasting my time.

 

Cost effectiveness, price/performance, and overall usage performance are all in favor of the 460.

 

I don't have a personal credit card or bank account either, so the best way for me to get things is off Amazon by buying an Amazon gift card. eBay doesn't do gift cards.

[H0R53]

6 minutes ago, Frankenburger said:

Ehm...you're kidding, right? The GT 1030 is on par with a GTX 750. So, no, a GTX 460 is not better than a GT 1030.

 

Also, Ebay is loaded with 750 Ti's for $30.

Also, take a look at this.

http://www.hwcompare.com/34851/geforce-gt-1030-vs-geforce-gtx-460-se/

 

For antialiasing, I use ONLY FXAA because it's 'software antialiasing', which uses the CPU in most cases.

 

The 460 also has better memory bandwidth and pixel rates.

 

The bus width is far higher as well.

[Vegetable]

20 minutes ago, H0R53 said:

The GTX 460 is better than the GT 1030 by a million miles, and the 750Ti is actually in short stock in the markets I use (Amazon), driving up the price to around $75.

Knowing fermi as well as I do, I can safely call BS. The 1030 is miles ahead of a 460 lmao. I'd say a 1030 is more akin to a 560 ti/570

[H0R53]

Just now, Vegetable said:

Knowing fermi as well as I do, I can safely call BS. The 1030 is miles ahead of a 460 lmao. I'd say a 1030 is more akin to a 560 ti/570

LOL

[Frankenburger]

HWcompare and userbenchmark are terrible sites to compare GPUs. Actual gaming benchmarks show the GT 1030 reaching near GTX 750 Ti levels of performance, which is faster than even a GTX 650 Ti. Saying the GTX 460 is faster than the GT 1030 is measurably and objectively wrong.

[H0R53]

1 minute ago, Frankenburger said:

HWcompare and userbenchmark are terrible sites to compare GPUs. Actual gaming benchmarks show the GT 1030 reaching near GTX 750 Ti levels of performance, which is faster than even a GTX 560 Ti. Saying the GTX 460 is faster than the GT 1030 is measurably and objectively wrong.

Then why are the measurements on those sites wrong? Haha, those are statistical facts based on specifications, you can't get more right on that.

 

You have no clue what you're talking about and it's quite obvious.

 

nVidia even stated that it's half the performance of a 1050Ti, and the 750Ti is the same level as the GTX 580 1.5GB version.

 

You're wrong.

[Frankenburger]

1 minute ago, H0R53 said:

You have no clue what you're talking about and it's quite obvious.

Says the person who blatantly did not read the GT 1030 review I posted earlier.

Probably shoulda done that before shooting your mouth off 

[H0R53]

Just now, Frankenburger said:

Says the person who blatantly did not read the GT 1030 review I posted earlier.

Probably shoulda done that before shooting your mouth off 

THose are your opinions and are not statistically accurate. The 460 is far older than the 1030 and has about 4000000000000x more performance data available.

[Frankenburger]

Just now, H0R53 said:

THose are your opinions and are not statistically accurate. The 460 is far older than the 1030 and has about 4000000000000x more performance data available.

Opinions are not measurable fact.

Also, you said it yourself the GT 1030 is half the performance of a 1050 Ti. I hope you realize half a 1050 Ti is 750 Ti performance.

Best stop now before the hole you dug gets above your shoulders.

[H0R53]

1 minute ago, Frankenburger said:

Opinions are not measurable fact.

Also, you said it yourself the GT 1030 is half the performance of a 1050 Ti. I hope you realize half a 1050 Ti is 750 Ti performance.

Best stop now before the hole you dug gets above your shoulders.

Half the 1050Ti is not 750Ti.

 

The GT 1030 is not the same performance of the GTX 750Ti.

 

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-750-Ti-vs-Nvidia-GT-1030/2187vsm283726

 

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-750-Ti-vs-GeForce-GT-1030

 

http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=3953&gid2=2194&compare=geforce-gt-1030-vs-geforce-gtx-750-ti-pny-performance-oc-2gb-edition

 

http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=3953&gid2=883&compare=geforce-gt-1030-vs-geforce-gtx-750-ti

 

https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/1014614/geforce-1000-series/gtx-750-ti-to-gt-1030-an-upgrade-/

 

EVERYONE is saying the 750Ti is WAY better than the 1030.

[DildorTheDecent]

Please only observe the GPU score when looking at the following links, do not factor in the overall or CPU score as they are not really relevant especially when the GPU is clearly the limiting factor. 

 

GTX 460 SE:

3DMark FireStrike: 3151 GPU score http://hwbot.org/submission/3414785_traktor_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_460_se_3066_marks

3DMark11 - Performance: 5274 GPU score: http://hwbot.org/submission/2462904_k404_3dmark11___performance_geforce_gtx_460_se_5487_marks

3DMark11 - Entry: 8507 GPU score: http://hwbot.org/submission/2462901_k404_3dmark11___entry_geforce_gtx_460_se_8938_marks

3DMark11 - Extreme: 1558 GPU score: http://hwbot.org/submission/2462907_k404_3dmark11___extreme_geforce_gtx_460_se_1763_marks

 

GT 1030:
3DMark FireStrike: 4241 GPU score: http://hwbot.org/submission/3625288_stingeryar_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gt_1030_3945_marks
3DMark11 - Performance: 4928 GPU score: http://hwbot.org/submission/3625234_stingeryar_3dmark11___performance_geforce_gt_1030_5845_marks
3DMark11 - Entry: 8997 GPU score: http://hwbot.org/submission/3570873_isonzo_3dmark11___entry_geforce_gt_1030_9485_marks
3DMark11 - Extreme: 1775 GPU score: http://hwbot.org/submission/3591284_spider220075_3dmark11___extreme_geforce_gt_1030_1988_marks

 

Even on LN2 the GTX 460 SE can't keep up. CPU does not have much of a factor since these benchmarks are GPU limited, especially in this configuration. 

[H0R53]

1 minute ago, DildorTheDecent said:

Please only observe the GPU score when looking at the following links, do not factor in the overall or CPU score as they are not really relevant especially when the GPU is clearly the limiting factor. 

 

GTX 460 SE:

 

3DMark11 - Performance: 5274 GPU

 

GT 1030:
3DMark11 - Performance: 4928 GPU 

 

Even on LN2 the GTX 460 SE can't keep up. CPU does not have much of a factor since these benchmarks are GPU limited, especially in this configuration. 

Those numbers are all that matters to me.

 

In my use case, all I'm doing is casual gaming on my couch. General performance is what matters most here.

 

You also have to factor in vRAM size - if the 460 had 2GB (an experiment I may try in the future), it would blast the fans and shroud off of the 1030.

[DildorTheDecent]

6 minutes ago, H0R53 said:

Those numbers are all that matters to me.

 

In my use case, all I'm doing is casual gaming on my couch. General performance is what matters most here.

 

You also have to factor in vRAM size - if the 460 had 2GB (an experiment I may try in the future), it would blast the fans and shroud off of the 1030.

woops my mistake actually had the scores the wrong way around. 

 

Just goes to show that you're just blindly cherry picking your info. 

 

460 SE http://hwbot.org/submission/2462904_k404_3dmark11___performance_geforce_gtx_460_se_5487_marks

GPU score: 4928^^^

 

1030 http://hwbot.org/submission/3625234_stingeryar_3dmark11___performance_geforce_gt_1030_5845_marks

GPU score: 5274^^^

[Frankenburger]

4 minutes ago, DildorTheDecent said:

Just goes to show that you're just blindly cherry picking your info. 

That or he's getting defensive and doesn't want to admit he made a poor purchasing decision.

[H0R53]

Just now, DildorTheDecent said:

woops my mistake actually had the links the wrong way around. 

 

Just goes to show that you're just blindly cherry picking your info. 

 

460 SE http://hwbot.org/submission/2462904_k404_3dmark11___performance_geforce_gtx_460_se_5487_marks

GPU score: 4928^^^

 

1030 http://hwbot.org/submission/3625234_stingeryar_3dmark11___performance_geforce_gt_1030_5845_marks

GPU score: 5274^^^

No, I'm actually using the wide availability of statistical evidence and picking the data that heavily favors my argument.

 

I'm not going to spend $30 more on a 1030 when the 460 performs very similarly, and even outperforms it when overclocked.

 

Power consumption is not a factor here.

 

As for the 750Ti, the cheapest 750Ti that I could find on Amazon was $129. Fuck that.

[Jurrunio]

But an HD 6850 can be had for this price now, and that's a bit faster.

[H0R53]

Just now, Frankenburger said:

That or he's getting defensive and doesn't want to admit he made a poor purchasing decision.

The 1030 and the 460 are very similar in performance, so why pay an additional $30 for maybe 5% more? Fuck that.

 

And like I said, the cheapest 750Ti on Amazon as of writing is $129.

[H0R53]

Just now, Jurrunio said:

But an HD 6850 can be had for this price now, and that's a bit faster.

LOL that won't fit in the target PC. Too long, even my custom 1050Ti barely squeezes in

[Frankenburger]

42 minutes ago, H0R53 said:

The 1030 and the 460 are very similar in performance, so why pay an additional $30 for maybe 5% more? Fuck that.

Let me make this easy for you.

 

We've already established the 750 Ti and GT 1030 perform similarly, thanks to Tom's Hardware.

 

The GTX 560 Ti is shown to be about 25% faster than a GTX 460.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/859?vs=858

 

The GTX 750 Ti is shown to be about 10% faster than the GTX 560 Ti.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1337?vs=1130

 

Do the math bro. Worst case scenario, you're getting a GTX 560 Ti equivalent card. Best case scenario, you're getting a GTX 750 Ti equivalent card. Either way, the GT 1030 is at least 25% faster than the GTX 460.

[Biggerboot]

Some synthetic benchmarks will favor the old Fermi cards because of CUDA core count and other architectural differences.  In gaming scenarios, it's a different story, and it's what you should care about unless you're doing really specific stuff with your CUDAs.

Not dissing the crafts work that went into your Dell mod.  I love people taking old hardware and making it work for them.  More power to you there.

[H0R53]

47 minutes ago, Frankenburger said:

Let me make this easy for you.

 

We've already established the 750 Ti and GT 1030 perform similarly, thanks to Tom's Hardware.

 

The GTX 560 Ti is shown to be about 25% faster than a GTX 460.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/859?vs=858

 

The GTX 750 Ti is shown to be about 10% faster than the GTX 560 Ti.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1337?vs=1130

 

Do the math bro. Worst case scenario, you're getting a GTX 560 Ti equivalent card. Best case scenario, you're getting a GTX 750 Ti equivalent card. Either way, the GT 1030 is at least 25% faster than the GTX 460.

When I have the money I'll buy a 1030 and I'll test it and prove you wrong.

 

40 minutes ago, Biggerboot said:

Some synthetic benchmarks will favor the old Fermi cards because of CUDA core count and other architectural differences.  In gaming scenarios, it's a different story, and it's what you should care about unless you're doing really specific stuff with your CUDAs.

Not dissing the crafts work that went into your Dell mod.  I love people taking old hardware and making it work for them.  More power to you there.

I wouldn't count Sandy/Ivy Bridge as old hardware. I'd put a 1050Ti in it, and I may at the end of the month when the numbers are in. I had to move the 550Ti into another PC so that's why I bought the 460 - $50 off a market that isn't shady like eBay and Craigslist is actually a good price, especially since you can see them for $1000+ from foreign markets who don't know how to America.