CPU
GPU
CMP 40HX
Popular choices:
Radeon R9 295X2
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The CMP 40HX is positioned at rank #119 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Balanced cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar CMP 40HX
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The CMP 40HX is significantly newer (2021 vs 2014). The CMP 40HX likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon R9 295X2 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The CMP 40HX is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Radeon R9 295X2 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | CMP 40HX | Radeon R9 295X2 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.2%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (4 GB) | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (307mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The CMP 40HX offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $120 versus $200 for the Radeon R9 295X2, it costs 40% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 67% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | CMP 40HX | Radeon R9 295X2 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+67%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($120) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of CMP 40HX and Radeon R9 295X2
CMP 40HX
The CMP 40HX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 25 2021. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1470 MHz to 1650 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 185W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 36 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,749 points. Launch price was $699.
Radeon R9 295X2
The Radeon R9 295X2 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 29 2014. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1018 MHz. It has 2816 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 500W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,734 points. Launch price was $1,499.
Graphics Performance
The CMP 40HX scores 8,749 and the Radeon R9 295X2 reaches 8,734 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The CMP 40HX is built on Turing while the Radeon R9 295X2 uses GCN 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (CMP 40HX) vs 2,816 (Radeon R9 295X2). Raw compute: 7.603 TFLOPS (CMP 40HX) vs 5.733 TFLOPS ×2 (Radeon R9 295X2). Boost clocks: 1650 MHz vs 1018 MHz.
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Radeon R9 295X2 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,749 | 8,734 |
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304 | 2816 ×2+22% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 7.603 TFLOPS+33% | 5.733 TFLOPS ×2 |
| Boost Clock | 1650 MHz+62% | 1018 MHz |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 ×2 |
| TMUs | 144 | 176 ×2+22% |
| L1 Cache | 2.3 MB+233% | 0.69 MB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+300% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Radeon R9 295X2 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The CMP 40HX comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 295X2 has 8 GB. The Radeon R9 295X2 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 512-bit x2. L2 Cache: 4 MB (CMP 40HX) vs 1 MB (Radeon R9 295X2) — the CMP 40HX has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Radeon R9 295X2 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 512-bit x2+300% |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+300% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (CMP 40HX) vs 12.0 (Radeon R9 295X2). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 6.
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Radeon R9 295X2 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2+9% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+7% | 4.3 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 6 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No (CMP 40HX) vs VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 295X2). Decoder: No vs UVD 4.2.
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Radeon R9 295X2 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No | VCE 2.0 |
| Decoder | No | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The CMP 40HX draws 185W versus the Radeon R9 295X2's 500W — a 92% difference. The CMP 40HX is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (CMP 40HX) vs 1000W (Radeon R9 295X2). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 2x 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 307mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 65°C.
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Radeon R9 295X2 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 185W-63% | 500W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W-50% | 1000W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 2x 8-pin |
| Length | 229mm | 307mm |
| Height | 111mm | 114mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 65°C-19% |
| Perf/Watt | 47.3+170% | 17.5 |
Value Analysis
The CMP 40HX launched at $699 MSRP and currently averages $120, while the Radeon R9 295X2 launched at $1499 and now averages $200. The CMP 40HX costs 40% less ($80 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 72.9 (CMP 40HX) vs 43.7 (Radeon R9 295X2) — the CMP 40HX offers 66.8% better value. The CMP 40HX is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2014).
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Radeon R9 295X2 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $699-53% | $1499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $120-40% | $200 |
| Performance per Dollar | 72.9+67% | 43.7 |
| Codename | TU106 | Vesuvius |
| Release | February 25 2021 | April 29 2014 |
| Ranking | #302 | #303 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on CMP 40HX and Radeon R9 295X2
