- Home
- Processors
- Videocards
- Home
- / Videocards
- / Compare videocards
- / NVIDIA GeForce 940MX vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 940MX and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M 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.
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX 
vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- Around 4% higher core clock speed: 954 MHz vs 914 MHz
- 3.3x lower typical power consumption: 23 Watt vs 75 Watt
- 2x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 1000 or 2500 MHz
| Launch date | 28 June 2016 vs 13 March 2015 |
| Core clock speed | 954 MHz vs 914 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 23 Watt vs 75 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 1000 or 2500 MHz |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
- Around 13% higher boost clock speed: 1124 MHz vs 993 MHz
- Around 89% higher texture fill rate: 44.96 GTexel / s vs 23.83 GTexel / s
- Around 67% higher pipelines: 640 vs 384
- Around 89% better floating-point performance: 1,439 gflops vs 762.6 gflops
- Around 70% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2577 vs 1516
- Around 26% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 217 vs 172
- Around 54% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9744 vs 6325
- Around 47% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 42.396 vs 28.91
- Around 19% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 373.644 vs 312.94
- Around 39% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.54 vs 1.83
- Around 42% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 39.412 vs 27.833
- Around 34% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 139.158 vs 103.937
- Around 67% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4148 vs 2486
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 3587
- Around 67% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4148 vs 2486
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 3587
- 5.7x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3350 vs 585
| Specifications (specs) |
| Boost clock speed | 1124 MHz vs 993 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 44.96 GTexel / s vs 23.83 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 640 vs 384 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,439 gflops vs 762.6 gflops |
| Benchmarks |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2577 vs 1516 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 217 vs 172 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9744 vs 6325 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 42.396 vs 28.91 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 373.644 vs 312.94 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.54 vs 1.83 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 39.412 vs 27.833 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 139.158 vs 103.937 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4148 vs 2486 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 3587 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4148 vs 2486 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 3587 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3357 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3350 vs 585 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 940MX GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
| 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 | | |
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce 940MX | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1516 | 2577 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 172 | 217 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6325 | 9744 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.91 | 42.396 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 312.94 | 373.644 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.83 | 2.54 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.833 | 39.412 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 103.937 | 139.158 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2486 | 4148 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3587 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2486 | 4148 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3587 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 585 | 3350 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce 940MX | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M |
Essentials |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell |
| Code name | GM108 | GM107 |
| Launch date | 28 June 2016 | 13 March 2015 |
| Place in performance rating | 1071 | 797 |
| Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
| Boost clock speed | 993 MHz | 1124 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 954 MHz | 914 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 762.6 gflops | 1,439 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 640 |
| Texture fill rate | 23.83 GTexel / s | 44.96 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 23 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,870 million | 1,870 million |
| CUDA cores | 640 |
Video outputs and ports |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | 1 |
| HDMI |
| VGA аnalog display support | 1 |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Laptop size | medium sized | medium sized |
| Supplementary power connectors | None |
API support |
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Memory |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 40.1 GB / s | 32 or 80 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 1000 or 2500 MHz |
| Memory type | DDR3, GDDR5 | DDR3 or GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 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
Differences Compare benchmarks Compare specifications (specs)
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare
Compare NVIDIA GeForce 940MX with others
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 About
AskGeek.io - Compare processors and videocards to choose the best.
Sections
Links
Language
English
Deutsch
Française
Español
Português
Русский © 2025, AskGeek.io