GeForce 840M vs Iris Graphics 540

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Graphics 540 and GeForce 840M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Iris Graphics 540
2015
15 Watt
3.26
+15.2%

Iris Graphics 540 outperforms 840M by a moderate 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking746795
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.905.88
ArchitectureGeneration 9.0 (2015−2016)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameSkylake GT3eGM108
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)12 March 2014 (10 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 cores384384
Core clock speed300 MHz1029 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1124 MHz
Number of transistors189 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt33 Watt
Texture fill rate48.0017.98
Floating-point processing power0.768 TFLOPS0.8632 TFLOPS
ROPs68
TMUs4816

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 supportno dataPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
InterfaceRing BusPCIe 3.0 x8

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 typeSystem SharedDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1001 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data16.02 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boostno data2.0
Optimus-+
GameWorks-+
Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL3.01.2
Vulkan1.31.1.126
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. 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.

Iris Graphics 540 3.26
+15.2%
GeForce 840M 2.83

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.

Iris Graphics 540 1258
+15.2%
GeForce 840M 1092

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Iris Graphics 540 2212
GeForce 840M 2340
+5.8%

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.

Iris Graphics 540 8828
+22.8%
GeForce 840M 7191

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.

Iris Graphics 540 1448
GeForce 840M 1573
+8.6%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Iris Graphics 540 11327
+29.8%
GeForce 840M 8724

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Iris Graphics 540 126078
+5.2%
GeForce 840M 119888

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

Iris Graphics 540 17
+143%
GeForce 840M 7

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

Iris Graphics 540 26
+387%
GeForce 840M 5

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

Iris Graphics 540 3
+115%
GeForce 840M 1

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

Iris Graphics 540 15
+73%
GeForce 840M 9

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

Iris Graphics 540 4
+117%
GeForce 840M 2

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

Iris Graphics 540 9
GeForce 840M 10
+20%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

Iris Graphics 540 0
GeForce 840M 13
+6550%

SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase

Iris Graphics 540 9
GeForce 840M 10
+20%

SPECviewperf 12 - Maya

This part of SPECviewperf 12 workstation benchmark uses Autodesk Maya 13 engine to render a superhero energy plant static scene consisting of more than 700 thousand polygons, in six different modes.

Iris Graphics 540 17
+143%
GeForce 840M 7

SPECviewperf 12 - Catia

Iris Graphics 540 15
+73%
GeForce 840M 9

SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks

Iris Graphics 540 26
+387%
GeForce 840M 5

SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX

Iris Graphics 540 3
+115%
GeForce 840M 1

SPECviewperf 12 - Medical

Iris Graphics 540 4
+117%
GeForce 840M 2

SPECviewperf 12 - Energy

Iris Graphics 540 0.2
GeForce 840M 13.3
+6550%

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:

900p50−55
+11.1%
45
−11.1%
Full HD21
+23.5%
17
−23.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+4.5%
21−24
−4.5%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+2.6%
35−40
−2.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+4.5%
21−24
−4.5%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
−35.3%
23
+35.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+2.6%
35−40
−2.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+4.5%
21−24
−4.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+133%
6
−133%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+2.6%
35−40
−2.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+5.9%
16−18
−5.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how Iris Graphics 540 and GeForce 840M compete in popular games:

  • Iris Graphics 540 is 11% faster in 900p
  • Iris Graphics 540 is 24% faster in 1080p

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Iris Graphics 540 is 133% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce 840M is 35% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Iris Graphics 540 is ahead in 29 tests (48%)
  • GeForce 840M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • there's a draw in 31 test (51%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.26 2.83
Recency 1 September 2015 12 March 2014
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 33 Watt

Iris Graphics 540 has a 15.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 120% lower power consumption.

The Iris Graphics 540 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 840M in performance tests.


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.


Intel Iris Graphics 540
Iris Graphics 540
NVIDIA GeForce 840M
GeForce 840M

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.


3.5 98 votes

Rate Iris Graphics 540 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 938 votes

Rate GeForce 840M 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.