NVIDIA GeForce 940MX vs NVIDIA Quadro K4100M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 940MX and NVIDIA Quadro K4100M 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 35% higher core clock speed: 954 MHz vs 706 MHz
- 4.3x lower typical power consumption: 23 Watt vs 100 Watt
- Around 57% higher memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 3200 MHz
- Around 18% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 28.91 vs 24.487
- Around 68% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 103.937 vs 61.984
- 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2486 vs 1105
- Around 82% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3587 vs 1974
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 3246
- 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2486 vs 1105
- Around 82% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3587 vs 1974
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 3246
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 28 June 2016 vs 23 July 2013 |
| Core clock speed | 954 MHz vs 706 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 23 Watt vs 100 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 3200 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.91 vs 24.487 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 103.937 vs 61.984 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2486 vs 1105 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3587 vs 1974 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 vs 3246 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2486 vs 1105 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3587 vs 1974 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 vs 3246 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K4100M
- 2.8x more texture fill rate: 67.78 GTexel / s vs 23.83 GTexel / s
- 3x more pipelines: 1152 vs 384
- 2.1x better floating-point performance: 1,627 gflops vs 762.6 gflops
- Around 83% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2772 vs 1516
- Around 89% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 325 vs 172
- Around 40% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 8831 vs 6325
- Around 92% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 600.985 vs 312.94
- Around 25% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.281 vs 1.83
- Around 27% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 35.452 vs 27.833
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 67.78 GTexel / s vs 23.83 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1152 vs 384 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,627 gflops vs 762.6 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2772 vs 1516 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 325 vs 172 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 8831 vs 6325 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 600.985 vs 312.94 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.281 vs 1.83 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 35.452 vs 27.833 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K4100M
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce 940MX | NVIDIA Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1516 | 2772 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 172 | 325 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6325 | 8831 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.91 | 24.487 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 312.94 | 600.985 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.83 | 2.281 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.833 | 35.452 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 103.937 | 61.984 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2486 | 1105 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3587 | 1974 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3246 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2486 | 1105 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3587 | 1974 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3246 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 585 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce 940MX | NVIDIA Quadro K4100M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
| Code name | GM108 | GK104 |
| Launch date | 28 June 2016 | 23 July 2013 |
| Place in performance rating | 1071 | 1074 |
| Type | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,499 | |
| Price now | $379.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 9.50 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 993 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 954 MHz | 706 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 762.6 gflops | 1,627 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 1152 |
| Texture fill rate | 23.83 GTexel / s | 67.78 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 23 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,870 million | 3,540 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Laptop size | medium sized | large |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 40.1 GB / s | 102.4 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 3200 MHz |
| Memory type | DDR3, GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||

