GeForce 940MX vs Radeon R7 265

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 265 with GeForce 940MX, including specs and performance data.

R7 265
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
10.43
+165%

R7 265 outperforms 940MX by a whopping 165% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking443708
Place by popularitynot in top-10081
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.32no data
Power efficiency4.7811.74
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code namePitcairnGM107
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 February 2014 (11 years ago)28 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores1024512
Core clock speedno data795 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHz861 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate59.2027.55
Floating-point processing power1.894 TFLOPS0.8817 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs6432

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 3.0PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-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 amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s40.1 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x 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+-
DDMA audio+no data
GPU Boostno data2.0
Optimus-+
GameWorks-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan-1.1.126
CUDA-+

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.

R7 265 10.43
+165%
GeForce 940MX 3.93

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.

R7 265 5220
+162%
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 HD45−50
+150%
18
−150%
4K24−27
+140%
10
−140%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.31no data
4K6.21no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Battlefield 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Fortnite 44
+0%
44
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18
+0%
18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 15
+0%
15
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Battlefield 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 58
+0%
58
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 48
+0%
48
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Fortnite 13
+0%
13
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14
+0%
14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 13
+0%
13
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14
+0%
14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+0%
12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 11
+0%
11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 46
+0%
46
+0%
Far Cry 5 11
+0%
11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9
+0%
9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+0%
7
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10
+0%
10
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how R7 265 and GeForce 940MX compete in popular games:

  • R7 265 is 150% faster in 1080p
  • R7 265 is 140% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.43 3.93
Recency 13 February 2014 28 June 2016
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 23 Watt

R7 265 has a 165.4% higher aggregate performance score.

GeForce 940MX, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and 552.2% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 265 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 940MX in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 265 is a desktop card while GeForce 940MX is a notebook one.

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.


AMD Radeon R7 265
Radeon R7 265
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
GeForce 940MX

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.


3.1 373 votes

Rate Radeon R7 265 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 2260 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 265 or GeForce 940MX, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.