NVIDIA GeForce 940MX versus AMD Radeon R7 M260
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce 940MX and AMD Radeon R7 M260 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 940MX
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 0 mois plus tard
- Environ 1% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 954 MHz versus 940 MHz
- Environ 1% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 993 MHz versus 980 MHz
- Environ 6% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 23.83 GTexel / s versus 22.56 GTexel / s
- Environ 6% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 762.6 gflops versus 721.9 gflops
- 5x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- 2.9x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1516 versus 517
- Environ 38% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 172 versus 125
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 6325 versus 5125
- 2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 28.91 versus 14.249
- 2.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 312.94 versus 145.3
- Environ 98% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.83 versus 0.925
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 27.833 versus 19.992
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 103.937 versus 77.895
- Environ 77% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2486 versus 1404
- 3.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3587 versus 1093
- Environ 97% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 versus 1704
- Environ 77% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2486 versus 1404
- 3.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3587 versus 1093
- Environ 97% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 versus 1704
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 28 June 2016 versus 11 June 2014 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz versus 940 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 993 MHz versus 980 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 23.83 GTexel / s versus 22.56 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 762.6 gflops versus 721.9 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1516 versus 517 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 172 versus 125 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6325 versus 5125 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.91 versus 14.249 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 312.94 versus 145.3 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.83 versus 0.925 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.833 versus 19.992 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 103.937 versus 77.895 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2486 versus 1404 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3587 versus 1093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 versus 1704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2486 versus 1404 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3587 versus 1093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 versus 1704 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 M260
| 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) |
|
|
| Nom | NVIDIA GeForce 940MX | AMD Radeon R7 M260 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1516 | 517 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 172 | 125 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6325 | 5125 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.91 | 14.249 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 312.94 | 145.3 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.83 | 0.925 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.833 | 19.992 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 103.937 | 77.895 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2486 | 1404 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3587 | 1093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 1704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2486 | 1404 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3587 | 1093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 1704 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 585 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce 940MX | AMD Radeon R7 M260 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 3.0 |
| Nom de code | GM108 | Topaz |
| Date de sortie | 28 June 2016 | 11 June 2014 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1071 | 1479 |
| Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $799 | |
| Prix maintenant | $799 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 1.33 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 993 MHz | 980 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz | 940 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 762.6 gflops | 721.9 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 384 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 23.83 GTexel / s | 22.56 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 23 Watt | |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 3,100 million |
| Unités de Compute | 6 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | medium sized |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.3 |
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 40.1 GB / s | 32 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3, GDDR5 | DDR3 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
| DualGraphics | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| PCIe 3.0 | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Graphiques changeables | ||
| Zero Core | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce 940MX avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce 940MX vs
NVIDIAGeForce FX 5600 XT
NVIDIAGeForce 940MX vs
ATIMobility Radeon 9600 PRO
NVIDIAGeForce 940MX vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 2500M
NVIDIAGeForce 940MX vs
NVIDIAQuadro K4100M
NVIDIAGeForce 940MX vs
AMDRadeon R5 A330
NVIDIAGeForce 940MX vs
AMDRadeon R6 M340DX
