GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB vs 940M

Place in the ranking	790	206
Place by popularity	not in top-100	20
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	74.97
Power efficiency	6.12	27.32
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GM108	GA107
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	13 March 2015 (9 years ago)	2 February 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$179

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	384	2304
Core clock speed	1072 MHz	1042 MHz
Boost clock speed	1176 MHz	1470 MHz
Number of transistors	1,870 million	8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	70 Watt
Texture fill rate	28.22	105.8
Floating-point processing power	0.9032 TFLOPS	6.774 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	32
TMUs	24	72
Tensor Cores	no data	72
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	18

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 size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	no data	242 mm
Width	no data	2-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	DDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	96 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14.4 GB/s	168.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost	2.0	no data
Optimus	+	-
GameWorks	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.3
CUDA	+	8.6

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 940M 2.80

RTX 3050 6 GB 26.52
+847%

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.

GeForce 940M 1127

RTX 3050 6 GB 10682
+848%

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	18 −844%	170−180 +844%
1440p	96 −838%	900−950 +838%
4K	20 −800%	180−190 +800%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	1.05
1440p	no data	0.20
4K	no data	0.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −844%	85−90 +844%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −829%	65−70 +829%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −829%	65−70 +829%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −844%	85−90 +844%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −829%	65−70 +829%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −829%	130−140 +829%
Forza Horizon 5	3−4 −800%	27−30 +800%
Metro Exodus	11 −809%	100−105 +809%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14 −829%	130−140 +829%
Valorant	3−4 −800%	27−30 +800%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −829%	65−70 +829%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −844%	85−90 +844%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −829%	65−70 +829%
Dota 2	21 −805%	190−200 +805%
Far Cry 5	16−18 −841%	160−170 +841%
Fortnite	18 −844%	170−180 +844%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −829%	130−140 +829%
Forza Horizon 5	3−4 −800%	27−30 +800%
Grand Theft Auto V	7 −829%	65−70 +829%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −800%	45−50 +800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30 −833%	280−290 +833%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −800%	90−95 +800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	15 −833%	140−150 +833%
Valorant	3−4 −800%	27−30 +800%
World of Tanks	68 −782%	600−650 +782%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −829%	65−70 +829%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −844%	85−90 +844%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −829%	65−70 +829%
Dota 2	45 −789%	400−450 +789%
Far Cry 5	13 −823%	120−130 +823%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −829%	130−140 +829%
Forza Horizon 5	3−4 −800%	27−30 +800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 −826%	250−260 +826%
Valorant	3−4 −800%	27−30 +800%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Grand Theft Auto V	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 −805%	190−200 +805%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
World of Tanks	20−22 −800%	180−190 +800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −800%	27−30 +800%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −775%	35−40 +775%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −829%	65−70 +829%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Forza Horizon 5	3−4 −800%	27−30 +800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −817%	55−60 +817%
Valorant	9−10 −844%	85−90 +844%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −800%	90−95 +800%
Dota 2	16−18 −838%	150−160 +838%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −833%	140−150 +833%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 −838%	75−80 +838%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −833%	140−150 +833%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −800%	90−95 +800%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Dota 2	16−18 −838%	150−160 +838%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −800%	27−30 +800%
Fortnite	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Forza Horizon 5	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Valorant	3−4 −800%	27−30 +800%

This is how GeForce 940M and RTX 3050 6 GB compete in popular games:

RTX 3050 6 GB is 844% faster in 1080p
RTX 3050 6 GB is 838% faster in 1440p
RTX 3050 6 GB is 800% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.80	26.52
Recency	13 March 2015	2 February 2024
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	70 Watt

RTX 3050 6 GB has a 847.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 7.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 940M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 940M is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.