CPU
GPU
GeForce 940A
Popular choices:
Radeon R9 M275
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. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce 940A is positioned at rank 320 and the Radeon R9 M275 is on rank 543, so the GeForce 940A offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 940A
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R9 M275
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R9 M275 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 940A.
| Insight | GeForce 940A | Radeon R9 M275 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 940A offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce 940A holds the technical lead. Priced at $80 (vs $300), it costs 73% less, resulting in a 272.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce 940A | Radeon R9 M275 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+272.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($80) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300) |
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 GeForce 940A and Radeon R9 M275
GeForce 940A
The GeForce 940A is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1029 MHz to 1124 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,107 points.
Radeon R9 M275
The Radeon R9 M275 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 28 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 900 MHz to 925 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,115 points. Launch price was $799.99.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 940A scores 1,107 and the Radeon R9 M275 reaches 1,115 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 940A is built on Maxwell while the Radeon R9 M275 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 940A) vs 640 (Radeon R9 M275). Raw compute: 0.8632 TFLOPS (GeForce 940A) vs 1.184 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M275). Boost clocks: 1124 MHz vs 925 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 940A | Radeon R9 M275 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,107 | 1,115 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 640+67% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.8632 TFLOPS | 1.184 TFLOPS+37% |
| Boost Clock | 1124 MHz+22% | 925 MHz |
| ROPs | 8 | 16+100% |
| TMUs | 16 | 40+150% |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB+20% | 160 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 940A | Radeon R9 M275 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 940A) vs 0.25 MB (Radeon R9 M275) — the GeForce 940A has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 940A | Radeon R9 M275 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | 64 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.0 (GeForce 940A) vs 12 (FL11_1) (Radeon R9 M275). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.1. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 6.
| Feature | GeForce 940A | Radeon R9 M275 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.0 | 12 (FL11_1)+9% |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+12% | 4.1 |
| Max Displays | 1 | 6+500% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 2 (GeForce 940A) vs UVD3 (Radeon R9 M275). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs VCE. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 (GeForce 940A) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,Flash (Radeon R9 M275).
| Feature | GeForce 940A | Radeon R9 M275 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 2 | UVD3 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP6 | VCE |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,Flash |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 940A draws 33W versus the Radeon R9 M275's 75W — a 77.8% difference. The GeForce 940A is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 940A) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M275). Power connectors: Legacy vs Mobile. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce 940A | Radeon R9 M275 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 33W-56% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Mobile |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C-6% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 33.5+125% | 14.9 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 940A launched at $80 MSRP and currently averages $80, while the Radeon R9 M275 launched at $300 and now averages $300. The GeForce 940A costs 73.3% less ($220 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 13.8 (GeForce 940A) vs 3.7 (Radeon R9 M275) — the GeForce 940A offers 273% better value. The GeForce 940A is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce 940A | Radeon R9 M275 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $80-73% | $300 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $80-73% | $300 |
| Performance per Dollar | 13.8+273% | 3.7 |
| Codename | GM108 | Venus |
| Release | March 13 2015 | January 28 2014 |
| Ranking | #853 | #851 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 940A and Radeon R9 M275
