Real World Speed
Performance profile from 46,959 user samples
16,457 User Benchmarks
Best Bench: 31% XFX(1682 9460)
Worst Bench: 25% XFX(1682 9460)
Poor: 25% Great: 31%
SPEED RANK: 81st / 566
30,502 User Benchmarks
Best Bench: 47% MSI(1462 2015)
Worst Bench: 39% Sapphire(174B E308)
Poor: 39% Great: 47%
SPEED RANK: 50th / 566
Effective 3D Speed
Effective 3D Gaming GPU Speed
28.4 % 44.5 % Much faster effective speed.
Avg. Parallax occlusion mapping (Stones)
99.6 fps 172 fps Much better texture detail.
Avg. Render target array GShader (Sphere)
63 fps 104 fps Much faster multi rendering.
Avg. NBody particle system (Galaxy)
73.4 fps 118 fps Much faster NBody calculation.
Avg. Force Splatted Flocking (Swarm)
77.7 fps 83.4 fps Slightly faster complex splatting.
Parallax occlusion mapping (Stones)
119 fps 194 fps Much better peak texture detail.
Render target array GShader (Sphere)
65.6 fps 109 fps Much faster peak multi rendering.
NBody particle system (Galaxy)
83.1 fps 125 fps Much faster peak NBody calculation.
Force Splatted Flocking (Swarm)
80.6 fps 89.8 fps Slightly faster peak complex splatting.
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
Avg. FPS @ 1080p on Max
118 fps 138 fps Better Counter-Strike: Global Offensive fps.
Avg. FPS @ 1080p on Max
60.7 fps 73 fps Better Overwatch fps.
Grand Theft Auto V
Avg. FPS @ 1080p on Max
40 fps 43.1 fps Slightly Better Grand Theft Auto V fps.
Battlefield 1
Avg. FPS @ 1080p on Max
42 fps 50.8 fps Better Battlefield 1 fps.
Avg. FPS @ 1080p on Max
67.3 fps 85.5 fps Better DOTA 2 fps.
World of Tanks
Avg. FPS @ 1080p on Max
53.2 fps 71.5 fps Much Better World of Tanks fps.
League of Legends
Avg. FPS @ 1080p on Max
118 fps 143 fps Better League of Legends fps.
Market Share
Based on 7,783,550 GPUs tested.
Market Share
Market Share (trailing 30 days)
0.37 % 0.38 % +3%
Value For Money
65.7 % Slightly better value.
61 %
User Rating
UBM User Rating
81 % 94 % More popular.
Price (score)
$104 Much cheaper.
19 Months Much more recent.
33 Months
Locally-deformable PRT (Bat)
89.6 fps 142 fps Much better peak lighting effects.
High dynamic range lighting (Teapot)
84.6 fps 138 fps Much better peak reflection handling.
Avg. Locally-deformable PRT (Bat)
77.2 fps 132 fps Much better lighting effects.
Avg. High dynamic range lighting (Teapot)
79.5 fps 128 fps Much better reflection handling.

The RX 460 is the third Polaris based 14 nm graphics card released by AMD this year, it follows the 470 and 480). The Polaris 11 GPU which drives the RX 460 is around 50% less powerful than the Polaris 10 GPU used by both the RX 480 and RX 470. Looking at the provisional average benchmarks (we only four samples of the RX 460 at this time) of the RX 460 and RX 480 shows that the performance gap of 50% percent is in line with the specs. The RX 460 is available with custom coolers from launch and it comes in both 2GB and 4GB varieties. With list prices starting from $120 for the 2GB variant the RX 460 offers decent value for money at the lower end of the graphics card spectrum. The 4GB version is somewhat poor value for money at the $150 price point since an RX 480 is only an additional $50 for double the performance. See the current value for money leaders here.  [Aug '16 GPUPro]


The AMD R9 380 succeeds the Tonga based R9 285. The only difference between the two cards is a tiny 2% GPU clock increase on the R9 380 but for the most part, the R9 380 is identical to the R9 285. We only have one sample of the R9 380 so far and comparing benchmarks between the R9 380 and R9 285 shows that the two cards are indeed very close. Unlike with several of the other AMD R9 300 series re-badges, the MSRP has actually dropped on the R9 380 to $199. This card could be a strong value contender if prices drop much below $200. [Jun '15 GPUPro]


Graphics Card Rankings (Price vs Performance) March 2018 GPU Rankings.

We calculate effective 3D speed which estimates gaming performance for the top 12 games. Effective speed is adjusted by current prices to yield value for money. Our calculated are checked against thousands of individual user ratings. The customizable table below combines these factors to bring you the definitive list of top GPUs. [GPUPro]


Group Test Results

  • Best user rated - User sentiment trumps benchmarks for this comparison.
  • Best gaming performance - Effective Speed measures performance for modern 3D games.
  • Best value for money - Value for money is based on 3D gaming performance and price.
  • Raw speed comparison - Raw speed readings.
How Fast Is Your GPU? (Bench your build) Size up your PC in less than a minute.

Welcome to our freeware PC speed test tool. UserBenchmark will test your PC and compare the results to other users with the same components. You can quickly size up your PC, identify hardware problems and explore the best upgrades.

UserBenchmark of the month

How it works

  • - Download and run UserBenchMark (UBM).
  • - CPU tests include: integer, floating and string.
  • - GPU tests include: six 3D game simulations.
  • - Drive tests include: read, write and mixed IO.
  • - Checks include: 4k Align, NCQ, TRIM, SATA, USB & S.M.A.R.T.
  • - RAM tests include: single/multi core bandwidth and latency.
  • - Reports are generated and presented on
  • - Identify the strongest components in your PC.
  • - See speed test results from other users.
  • - Compare your components to the highest voted in class.
  • - Find the best upgrades.
  • - Share your opinion by voting.

 Frequently Asked Questions

 Best User Rated

The Best.
Intel Core i7-8700K $330Nvidia GTX 1070 $447Samsung 850 Evo 250GB $85
Intel Core i7-7700K $290Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB $335Samsung 850 Evo 500GB $146
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 $189AMD RX 480 $400Samsung 850 Pro 256GB $160
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $44Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $198SanDisk Extreme 64GB $44
Seagate Barracuda 3TB (2016) $80G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $931SanDisk Extreme 32GB $23
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 1TB $51Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $205SanDisk Extreme 16GB $18
Today's hottest deals
User Guide  •  About  •  FAQs  •  @Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer Feedback