GeForce 940MX vs Radeon R9 295X2

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 295X2 with GeForce 940MX, including specs and performance data.

R9 295X2
2014, $1,499
8 GB GDDR5, 500 Watt
21.07
+484%

R9 295X2 outperforms 940MX by a whopping 484% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking309785
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.24no data
Power efficiency3.2812.22
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameVesuviusGM107
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date29 April 2014 (12 years ago)28 June 2016 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores2816 ×2512
Core clock speedno data795 MHz
Boost clock speed1018 MHz861 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)500 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate179.2 ×227.55
Floating-point processing power5.733 TFLOPS ×20.8817 TFLOPS
ROPs64 ×28
TMUs176 ×232
L1 Cache704 KB256 KB
L2 Cache1024 KB1024 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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 2.1 x16PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length307 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2 x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR3, GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB ×24 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit ×264 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth640 GB/s ×240.1 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data
GPU Boostno data2.0
Optimus-+
GameWorks-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.2
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.

R9 295X2 21.07
+484%
GeForce 940MX 3.61

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R9 295X2 8816
+484%
Samples: 546
GeForce 940MX 1509
Samples: 7075

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.

R9 295X2 21197
+962%
GeForce 940MX 1996

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 HD100−11018
−82%
4K55−60
+450%
10

Cost per frame, $

1080p14.99no data
4K27.25no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 9−10 9−10
Counter-Strike 2 14−16 14−16
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8 7−8
Resident Evil 4 Remake 5−6 5−6

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 9−10 9−10
Battlefield 5 16 16
Counter-Strike 2 14−16 14−16
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8 7−8
Far Cry 5 12 12
Fortnite 44 44
Forza Horizon 4 18 18
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 15 15
Valorant 50−55 50−55

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 9−10 9−10
Battlefield 5 13 13
Counter-Strike 2 14−16 14−16
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 58 58
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8 7−8
Dota 2 48 48
Far Cry 5 12 12
Fortnite 13 13
Forza Horizon 4 14 14
Grand Theft Auto V 13 13
Metro Exodus 6−7 6−7
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14 14
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12 12
Valorant 50−55 50−55

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 11 11
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8 7−8
Dota 2 46 46
Far Cry 5 11 11
Forza Horizon 4 12 12
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9 9
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7 7
Valorant 50−55 50−55

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 10 10

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 7−8 7−8
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30 27−30
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2 1−2
Metro Exodus 1−2 1−2
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33 30−33
Valorant 35−40 35−40

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 2−3
Far Cry 5 6−7 6−7
Forza Horizon 4 8−9 8−9
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 5−6

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 7−8 7−8

4K
High

Atomic Heart 2−3 2−3
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 14−16
Valorant 16−18 16−18

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 10−12 10−12
Far Cry 5 2−3 2−3
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 4−5
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5 4−5

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5 4−5

This is how R9 295X2 and GeForce 940MX compete in popular games:

  • R9 295X2 is 456% faster in 1080p
  • R9 295X2 is 450% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 21.07 3.61
Recency 29 April 2014 28 June 2016
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 500 Watt 23 Watt

R9 295X2 has a 484% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GeForce 940MX, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and 95% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 295X2 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 940MX in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 295X2 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce 940MX is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 106 votes

Rate Radeon R9 295X2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 2532 votes

Rate GeForce 940MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 295X2 or GeForce 940MX, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.