NVIDIA GeForce 940M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA GeForce 940M und NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M Videokarten für alle bekannten Merkmale in den folgenden Kategorien: Essenzielles, Technische Info, Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse, Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen, API-Unterstützung, Speicher, Technologien. Benchmark-Videokarten Leistungsanalyse: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Unterschiede
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce 940M
- 2.3x geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 33 Watt vs 75 Watt
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 33 Watt vs 75 Watt |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
- Etwa 2% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:1096 MHz vs 1072 MHz
- Etwa 67% höhere Texturfüllrate: 47.04 GTexel / s vs 28.22 GTexel / s
- Etwa 67% höhere Leitungssysteme: 640 vs 384
- Etwa 67% bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 1,505 gflops vs 903.2 gflops
- 2x mehr maximale Speichergröße: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- Etwa 39% höhere Speichertaktfrequenz: 2500 MHz vs 1800 MHz
- 3x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3366 vs 1127
- Etwa 59% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 245 vs 154
- Etwa 84% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 10985 vs 5982
- 2.1x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 54.294 vs 25.98
- 4.7x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 795.325 vs 168.449
- 2.8x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.692 vs 1.307
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 51.794 vs 21.837
- Etwa 72% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 174.513 vs 101.399
- 2.5x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5264 vs 2132
- Etwa 21% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3714 vs 3065
- 2.5x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5264 vs 2132
- Etwa 21% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3714 vs 3065
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1231 vs 506
Spezifikationen | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1096 MHz vs 1072 MHz |
Texturfüllrate | 47.04 GTexel / s vs 28.22 GTexel / s |
Leitungssysteme | 640 vs 384 |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1,505 gflops vs 903.2 gflops |
Maximale Speichergröße | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 2500 MHz vs 1800 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3366 vs 1127 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 245 vs 154 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 10985 vs 5982 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 54.294 vs 25.98 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 795.325 vs 168.449 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.692 vs 1.307 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.794 vs 21.837 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 174.513 vs 101.399 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5264 vs 2132 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 vs 3065 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3357 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5264 vs 2132 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 vs 3065 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3357 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1231 vs 506 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 940M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce 940M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1127 | 3366 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 154 | 245 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5982 | 10985 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.98 | 54.294 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 168.449 | 795.325 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.307 | 3.692 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.837 | 51.794 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 101.399 | 174.513 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2132 | 5264 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3065 | 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2132 | 5264 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3065 | 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 506 | 1231 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA GeForce 940M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Maxwell | Maxwell |
Codename | GM108 | GM107 |
Startdatum | 13 March 2015 | 13 March 2015 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 1184 | 735 |
Typ | Laptop | Laptop |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1176 MHz | 1176 MHz |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1072 MHz | 1096 MHz |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 903.2 gflops | 1,505 gflops |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 384 | 640 |
Texturfüllrate | 28.22 GTexel / s | 47.04 GTexel / s |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 33 Watt | 75 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 1,870 million | 1,870 million |
CUDA-Kerne | 640 | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | No outputs |
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) Unterstützung | 1 | |
HDMI | ||
VGA аnalog Display-Unterstützung | 1 | |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Busunterstützung | PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 3.0 |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |
Laptop-Größe | medium sized | medium sized |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 2 GB | 4 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 14.4 GB / s | 80 GB / s |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 1800 MHz | 2500 MHz |
Speichertyp | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | 0 |
Technologien |
||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
Ansel | ||
BatteryBoost | ||
DSR | ||
GameStream | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
SLI |