FireStream 9250 vs GeForce 940M
FireStream 9250
Popular choices:
GeForce 940M
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 FireStream 9250 is positioned at rank #340 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower 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 FireStream 9250
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 940M is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The GeForce 940M likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The FireStream 9250 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FireStream 9250 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.8% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce 940M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 940M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the FireStream 9250 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 FireStream 9250 and GeForce 940M
FireStream 9250
The FireStream 9250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 16 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,165 points.
GeForce 940M
The GeForce 940M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1072 MHz to 1176 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,133 points.
Graphics Performance
The FireStream 9250 scores 1,165 and the GeForce 940M reaches 1,133 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FireStream 9250 is built on TeraScale while the GeForce 940M uses Maxwell, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (FireStream 9250) vs 384 (GeForce 940M). Raw compute: 1 TFLOPS (FireStream 9250) vs 0.9032 TFLOPS (GeForce 940M).
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 940M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,165+3% | 1,133 |
| Architecture | TeraScale | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 800+108% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1 TFLOPS+11% | 0.9032 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 40+67% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB | 192 KB+20% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 940M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FireStream 9250 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce 940M has 2 GB. The GeForce 940M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (FireStream 9250) vs 1 MB (GeForce 940M) — the GeForce 940M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 940M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 2 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (FireStream 9250) vs 12 (11_0) (GeForce 940M). Vulkan: N/A vs 1.1. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 4.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 940M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 12 (11_0)+19% |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6+39% |
| Max Displays | 1 | 4+300% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (FireStream 9250) vs NVENC (Maxwell) (GeForce 940M). Decoder: UVD 2.0 vs PureVideo HD (VP6). Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1 (FireStream 9250) vs H.264,H.265,VP9 (GeForce 940M).
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 940M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | NVENC (Maxwell) |
| Decoder | UVD 2.0 | PureVideo HD (VP6) |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1 | H.264,H.265,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The FireStream 9250 draws 150W versus the GeForce 940M's 33W — a 127.9% difference. The GeForce 940M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FireStream 9250) vs 350W (GeForce 940M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Card length: 234mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: Unknown vs 75.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 940M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 33W-78% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 234mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | Unknown-100% | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 7.8 | 34.3+340% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 940M is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2008).
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 940M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $999 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49 | — |
| Codename | RV770 | GM108 |
| Release | June 16 2008 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #840 | #847 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FireStream 9250 and GeForce 940M
