Mobility Radeon HD 5730 vs GeForce 940M

Place in performance ranking	745	956
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.12	no data
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2018)	Terascale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code name	N16S-GT-S/B	Madison
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	12 March 2015 (9 years ago)	7 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Current price	$879	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	384	400
Core clock speed	1072 MHz	650 MHz
Boost clock speed	1176 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,870 million	627 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	26 Watt
Texture fill rate	28.22	13.00
Floating-point performance	903.2 gflops	520.0 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce 940M and Mobility Radeon HD 5730 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	medium sized	medium sized
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 2.0 x16

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	DDR3, GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14.4 GB/s	25.6 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

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	+	no data
GameWorks	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.0
OpenGL	4.5	4.4
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/A
CUDA	+	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 2.90
+107%

ATI Mobility HD 5730 1.40

GeForce 940M outperforms Mobility Radeon HD 5730 by 107% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GeForce 940M 7531
+97.7%

ATI Mobility HD 5730 3809

GeForce 940M outperforms Mobility Radeon HD 5730 by 98% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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:

900p	27−30 +92.9%	14 −92.9%
Full HD	19 +5.6%	18 −5.6%
1440p	96 +113%	45−50 −113%
4K	20 +122%	9−10 −122%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7
+50%

4−5

−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5	0−1
Battlefield 5	17 +113%	8−9 −113%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +20%	10−11 −20%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	11 +120%	5−6 −120%
Far Cry New Dawn	11 +120%	5−6 −120%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Hitman 3	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10 +42.9%	7−8 −42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5	0−1
Battlefield 5	13 +117%	6−7 −117%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +20%	10−11 −20%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	10 +150%	4−5 −150%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Hitman 3	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Metro Exodus	2 +0%	2−3 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10 +150%	4−5 −150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5	0−1
Battlefield 5	11 +120%	5−6 −120%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	10 +150%	4−5 −150%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6 +50%	4−5 −50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Hitman 3	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	2 −50%	3−4 +50%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%

This is how GeForce 940M and ATI Mobility HD 5730 compete in popular games:

GeForce 940M is 92.9% faster than ATI Mobility HD 5730 in 900p
GeForce 940M is 5.6% faster than ATI Mobility HD 5730 in 1080p
GeForce 940M is 113% faster than ATI Mobility HD 5730 in 1440p
GeForce 940M is 122% faster than ATI Mobility HD 5730 in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce 940M is 600% faster than the ATI Mobility HD 5730.
in Far Cry 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the ATI Mobility HD 5730 is 50% faster than the GeForce 940M.

All in all, in popular games:

GeForce 940M is ahead in 27 tests (84%)
ATI Mobility HD 5730 is ahead in 1 test (3%)
there's a draw in 4 tests (13%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.90	1.40
Recency	12 March 2015	7 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	26 Watt