GeForce GTS 350M vs 940MX

Place in performance ranking	667	1064
Place by popularity	88	not in top-100
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2018)	GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code name	N16S-GTR-B/S	n11e-ge1
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	10 March 2016 (8 years ago)	7 January 2010 (14 years ago)

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	96
CUDA cores	no data	96
Core clock speed	1122 MHz	500 MHz
Boost clock speed	1242 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,870 million	727 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	23.83	16.00
Floating-point performance	762.6 gflops	240 gflops
Floating-point performance	0.7626 gflops	0.24 gflops
Gigaflops	no data	360

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce 940MX and GeForce GTS 350M 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	large
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	MXM-II
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data
SLI options	-	+
MXM Type	no data	MXM 3.0 Type-B

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, GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	4000 MHz	Up to 2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	40.1 GB/s	51.2 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	DisplayPortLVDSHDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGA
HDMI	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536

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	+	-
Power management	no data	8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	5.1	4.1
OpenGL	4.5	2.1
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.1	N/A
CUDA	+	+

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 940MX 3.93
+274%

GTS 350M 1.05

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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 940MX 1516
+272%

GTS 350M 407

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 +350%	4−5 −350%
4K	10 +400%	2−3 −400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8
+133%

3−4

−133%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	11 +120%	5−6 −120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Battlefield 5	14 +367%	3−4 −367%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Far Cry 5	11 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Forza Horizon 4	71	0−1
Hitman 3	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +108%	12−14 −108%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	19 +171%	7−8 −171%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +31.3%	30−35 −31.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14 +180%	5−6 −180%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Battlefield 5	10 +400%	2−3 −400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Far Cry 5	11 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Forza Horizon 4	41	0−1
Hitman 3	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +108%	12−14 −108%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30 +173%	10−12 −173%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +31.3%	30−35 −31.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5 +0%	5−6 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Far Cry 5	8 +700%	1−2 −700%
Forza Horizon 4	12	0−1
Hitman 3	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Horizon Zero Dawn	11 −18.2%	12−14 +18.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7 −57.1%	10−12 +57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +31.3%	30−35 −31.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11
+900%

1−2

−900%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
+100%

4−5

−100%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3	0−1
Hitman 3	0−1	0−1
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
+150%

2−3

−150%

This is how GeForce 940MX and GTS 350M compete in popular games:

GeForce 940MX is 350% faster in 1080p
GeForce 940MX is 400% faster in 4K

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

in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce 940MX is 1000% faster.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTS 350M is 57% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GeForce 940MX is ahead in 40 tests (93%)
GTS 350M is ahead in 2 tests (5%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.93	1.05
Recency	10 March 2016	7 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	28 Watt

GeForce 940MX has a 274.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 21.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce 940MX is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 350M in performance tests.

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