Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) vs GeForce GTX 295

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 295 with Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5), including specs and performance data.

GTX 295
2009
1792 MB GDDR3, 289 Watt
3.12

Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) outperforms GTX 295 by a moderate 17% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking717678
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.17no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameGT200BSurface Book
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date8 January 2009 (15 years ago)1 October 2015 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$500 no data
Current price$200 (0.4x MSRP)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 cores240384
CUDA cores480no data
CUDA cores per GPU240no data
Core clock speed576 MHz954 MHz
Boost clock speedno data993 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)289 Wattno data
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate92.2 billion/secno data
Floating-point performance2x 596.2 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 295 and Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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.

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm)no data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors6-pin & 8-pinno data
SLI options+no data

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1792 MB1 GB
Standard memory config per GPU896 MBno data
Memory bus width896 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz5012 MHz
Memory bandwidth223.8 GB/sno data
Memory interface width per GPU448 Bitno data
Shared memoryno data-

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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVIHDMIno data
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)128bitno data
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)DirectX 12 (FL 11_0), Shader 5.0
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL2.1no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/Ano data
CUDA++

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 HD21−24
−33.3%
28
+33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Battlefield 5 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Battlefield 5 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Battlefield 5 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how GTX 295 and Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) compete in popular games:

  • Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) is 33% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.12 3.66
Recency 8 January 2009 1 October 2015
Maximum RAM amount 1792 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm

The Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 295 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 295 is a desktop card while Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) is a notebook one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
GeForce GTX 295
NVIDIA Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5)
Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5)

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.9 79 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 295 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.