NVIDIA GeForce 940MX vs NVIDIA Quadro K2100M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 940MX and NVIDIA Quadro K2100M 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 940MX

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 11 month(s) later
• Around 43% higher core clock speed: 954 MHz vs 667 MHz
• 2.4x lower typical power consumption: 23 Watt vs 55 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• Around 67% higher memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 3008 MHz
• Around 12% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1519 vs 1357
• Around 41% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 6348 vs 4515
• 2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 28.91 vs 12.383
• Around 65% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.83 vs 1.107
• Around 28% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 27.833 vs 21.761
• 2.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 103.937 vs 40.703
• Around 8% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2486 vs 2294
• Around 8% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2486 vs 2294

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M

• Around 34% higher texture fill rate: 32.02 GTexel / s vs 23.83 GTexel / s
• Around 50% higher pipelines: 576 vs 384
• Around 1% better floating-point performance: 768.4 gflops vs 762.6 gflops
• Around 64% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 282 vs 172
• Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 358.892 vs 312.94
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3605 vs 3587
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3605 vs 3587

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2100M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1519 1357
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	172 282
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	6348 4515
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	28.91 12.383
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	312.94 358.892
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.83 1.107
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	27.833 21.761
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	103.937 40.703
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2486 2294
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3587 3605
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3357 3362
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2486 2294
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3587 3605
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3357 3362

Compare specifications (specs)