GRID K240Q vs GeForce GTX 950M
GRID K240Q
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 950M
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 GRID K240Q is positioned at rank 210 and the GeForce GTX 950M is on rank 83, so the GeForce GTX 950M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID K240Q
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 950M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 950M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID K240Q.
| Insight | GRID K240Q | GeForce GTX 950M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 950M 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 GRID K240Q and GeForce GTX 950M
GRID K240Q
The GRID K240Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 28 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,541 points. Launch price was $469.
GeForce GTX 950M
The GeForce GTX 950M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 914 MHz to 1124 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,575 points.
Graphics Performance
The GRID K240Q scores 2,541 and the GeForce GTX 950M reaches 2,575 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID K240Q is built on Kepler while the GeForce GTX 950M uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID K240Q) vs 640 (GeForce GTX 950M). Raw compute: 2.289 TFLOPS (GRID K240Q) vs 1.439 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 950M).
| Feature | GRID K240Q | GeForce GTX 950M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,541 | 2,575+1% |
| Architecture | Kepler | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536+140% | 640 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.289 TFLOPS+59% | 1.439 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 128+220% | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 320 KB+150% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 2 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID K240Q | GeForce GTX 950M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (GRID K240Q) vs 2 MB (GeForce GTX 950M) — the GeForce GTX 950M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID K240Q | GeForce GTX 950M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 2 MB+300% |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID K240Q draws 225W versus the GeForce GTX 950M's 75W — a 100% difference. The GeForce GTX 950M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID K240Q) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 950M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin.
| Feature | GRID K240Q | GeForce GTX 950M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 75W-67% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 1mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 11.3 | 34.3+204% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 950M is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).
| Feature | GRID K240Q | GeForce GTX 950M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $500 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40 | — |
| Codename | GK104 | GM107 |
| Release | June 28 2013 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #628 | #626 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GRID K240Q and GeForce GTX 950M
