NVIDIA GeForce 940M vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 940M and NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: 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.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 940M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- 4x more pipelines: 384 vs 96
- 3.8x better floating-point performance: 903.2 gflops vs 240.0 gflops
- 2.3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1127 vs 497
- Around 8% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 154 vs 142
- 2.7x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5982 vs 2229
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2132 vs 999
- Around 31% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3065 vs 2333
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 3257
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2132 vs 999
- Around 31% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3065 vs 2333
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 3257
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 March 2015 vs 1 October 2012 |
| Pipelines | 384 vs 96 |
| Floating-point performance | 903.2 gflops vs 240.0 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1127 vs 497 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 154 vs 142 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5982 vs 2229 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2132 vs 999 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3065 vs 2333 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 vs 3257 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2132 vs 999 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3065 vs 2333 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 vs 3257 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M
- 2.2x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 33 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 33 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 940M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce 940M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1127 | 497 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 154 | 142 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5982 | 2229 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.98 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 168.449 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.307 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.837 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 101.399 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2132 | 999 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3065 | 2333 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3257 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2132 | 999 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3065 | 2333 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3257 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 506 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce 940M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Fermi 2.0 |
| Code name | GM108 | GF117 |
| Launch date | 13 March 2015 | 1 October 2012 |
| Place in performance rating | 1184 | 1207 |
| Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1176 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 1072 MHz | |
| Floating-point performance | 903.2 gflops | 240.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 96 |
| Texture fill rate | 28.22 GTexel / s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,870 million | 585 million |
| CUDA cores | 96 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 2.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Laptop size | medium sized | medium sized |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Memory type | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
| 3D Blu-Ray | ||
| DirectCompute | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce 940M with others
NVIDIAGeForce 940M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 645M
NVIDIAGeForce 940M vs
AMDRadeon R6 M255DX
NVIDIAGeForce 940M vs
AMDFirePro W2100
NVIDIAGeForce 940M vs
AMDRadeon R8 M350DX
NVIDIAGeForce 940M vs
AMDRadeon R5 M430
NVIDIAGeForce 940M vs
AMDRadeon E9171 MCM
