GeForce GT 710 vs Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) with GeForce GT 710, including specs and performance data.
Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) outperforms GT 710 by a whopping 130% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 793 | 1037 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 81 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.04 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 6.03 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2017) | Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015) |
| GPU code name | Surface Book | GK208 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 October 2015 (10 years ago) | 27 March 2014 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $34.99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 384 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 954 MHz | 954 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 993 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 915 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 19 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 95 °C |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 15.26 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.3663 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 16 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 16 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 128 KB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Bus support | no data | PCI Express 2.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x8 |
| Length | no data | 145 mm |
| Height | no data | 2.713" (6.9 cm) |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 1.8 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 14.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | Dual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA |
| Multi monitor support | no data | 3 displays |
| HDMI | - | + |
| HDCP | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | Internal |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| 3D Vision | - | + |
| PureVideo | - | + |
| PhysX | - | + |
| Optimus | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX 12 (FL 11_0), Shader 5.0 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | + | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.
3DMark Ice Storm GPU
Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 28
+250%
| 8
−250%
|
| 1440p | 6−7
+100%
| 3
−100%
|
| 4K | 16−18
+129%
| 7
−129%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 4.37 |
| 1440p | no data | 11.66 |
| 4K | no data | 5.00 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+100%
|
5
−100%
|
| Fortnite | 18−20
+280%
|
5−6
−280%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+113%
|
8−9
−113%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+50%
|
10−11
−50%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 60−65
+90.9%
|
30−35
−90.9%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+60%
|
20
−60%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+150%
|
4
−150%
|
| Fortnite | 18−20
+280%
|
5−6
−280%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+113%
|
8−9
−113%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9
−11.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6−7
+100%
|
3
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+50%
|
10−11
−50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12
+120%
|
5
−120%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+77.8%
|
18
−77.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+150%
|
4
−150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+113%
|
8−9
−113%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+50%
|
10−11
−50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12
+267%
|
3
−267%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 18−20
+280%
|
5−6
−280%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
+160%
|
10−11
−160%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7
−42.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Palworld | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Palworld | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Palworld | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Palworld | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Palworld | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
High
| Valorant | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
This is how Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) and GT 710 compete in popular games:
- Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) is 250% faster in 1080p
- Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) is 100% faster in 1440p
- Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) is 129% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) is 550% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) performs better in 29 tests (58%)
- there's a draw in 21 tests (42%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.41 | 1.48 |
| Recency | 1 October 2015 | 27 March 2014 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) has a 130% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.
GT 710, on the other hand, has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
The Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 710 in performance tests.
Be aware that Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) is a notebook graphics card while GeForce GT 710 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
