NVIDIA GeForce 940M versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce 940M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire, Technologies. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: 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.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce 940M
- 2.3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 33 Watt versus 75 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt versus 75 Watt |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
- Environ 2% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1096 MHz versus 1072 MHz
- Environ 67% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 47.04 GTexel / s versus 28.22 GTexel / s
- Environ 67% de pipelines plus haut: 640 versus 384
- Environ 67% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,505 gflops versus 903.2 gflops
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 39% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 2500 MHz versus 1800 MHz
- 3x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3366 versus 1127
- Environ 59% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 245 versus 154
- Environ 84% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 10985 versus 5982
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 54.294 versus 25.98
- 4.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 795.325 versus 168.449
- 2.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.692 versus 1.307
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 51.794 versus 21.837
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 174.513 versus 101.399
- 2.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5264 versus 2132
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3714 versus 3065
- 2.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5264 versus 2132
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3714 versus 3065
- 2.4x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1231 versus 506
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1096 MHz versus 1072 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 47.04 GTexel / s versus 28.22 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 640 versus 384 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,505 gflops versus 903.2 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2500 MHz versus 1800 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3366 versus 1127 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 245 versus 154 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10985 versus 5982 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 54.294 versus 25.98 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 795.325 versus 168.449 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.692 versus 1.307 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.794 versus 21.837 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 174.513 versus 101.399 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5264 versus 2132 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 versus 3065 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5264 versus 2132 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 versus 3065 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3357 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1231 versus 506 |
Comparer les références
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 |
|
|
| Nom | 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 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce 940M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell |
| Nom de code | GM108 | GM107 |
| Date de sortie | 13 March 2015 | 13 March 2015 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1184 | 735 |
| Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1176 MHz | 1176 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1072 MHz | 1096 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 903.2 gflops | 1,505 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 640 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 28.22 GTexel / s | 47.04 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 1,870 million |
| Noyaux CUDA | 640 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | 1 | |
| HDMI | ||
| Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | 1 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | medium sized |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 14.4 GB / s | 80 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 2500 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| Ansel | ||
| BatteryBoost | ||
| DSR | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce 940M avec des autres
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
