GeForce GT 325M vs 940M

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking782not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.12no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGM108GT216
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date13 March 2015 (9 years ago)10 January 2010 (14 years ago)

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 cores38448
Core clock speed1072 MHz450 MHz
Boost clock speed1176 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate28.227.200
Floating-point processing power0.9032 TFLOPS0.09504 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data142
ROPs88
TMUs2416

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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 2.0 x16
SLI options-+

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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHzUp to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s22.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputsDual Link DVIDisplayPortHDMIVGASingle Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+-
GameWorks+-
Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.52.1
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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 1125
+566%
GT 325M 169

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.

GeForce 940M 7531
+248%
GT 325M 2161

Pros & cons summary


Recency 13 March 2015 10 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 23 Watt

GeForce 940M has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 325M, on the other hand, has 226.1% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 940M and GeForce GT 325M. We've got no test results to judge.


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 940M
GeForce 940M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 325M
GeForce GT 325M

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.


3.3 672 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 12 votes

Rate GeForce GT 325M 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.