Radeon 625 vs GeForce 840M
Radeon 625
Popular choices:
GeForce 840M
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 Radeon 625 is positioned at rank 357 and the GeForce 840M is on rank 352, so the GeForce 840M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon 625
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 840M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon 625 uses modern memory architecture. The Radeon 625 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 840M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 840M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.1% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (2 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon 625.
| Insight | Radeon 625 | GeForce 840M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.1%) |
| Longevity | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) (28nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce 840M 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 Radeon 625 and GeForce 840M
Radeon 625
The Radeon 625 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 13 2019. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 730 MHz to 1024 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,077 points.
GeForce 840M
The GeForce 840M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 12 2014. 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: 1,100 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon 625 scores 1,077 and the GeForce 840M reaches 1,100 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon 625 is built on GCN 3.0 while the GeForce 840M uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (Radeon 625) vs 384 (GeForce 840M). Raw compute: 0.7864 TFLOPS (Radeon 625) vs 0.8632 TFLOPS (GeForce 840M). Boost clocks: 1024 MHz vs 1124 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon 625 | GeForce 840M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,077 | 1,100+2% |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7864 TFLOPS | 0.8632 TFLOPS+10% |
| Boost Clock | 1024 MHz | 1124 MHz+10% |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 24+50% | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 96 KB | 192 KB+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.13 MB | 1 MB+669% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon 625 | GeForce 840M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon 625 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce 840M has 2 GB. The GeForce 840M offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.13 MB (Radeon 625) vs 1 MB (GeForce 840M) — the GeForce 840M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon 625 | GeForce 840M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 2 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.13 MB | 1 MB+669% |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon 625 draws 50W versus the GeForce 840M's 33W — a 41% difference. The GeForce 840M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon 625) vs 350W (GeForce 840M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.
| Feature | Radeon 625 | GeForce 840M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W | 33W-34% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | — | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 21.5 | 33.3+55% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon 625 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2014).
| Feature | Radeon 625 | GeForce 840M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50 | — |
| Codename | Polaris 24 | GM108 |
| Release | May 13 2019 | March 12 2014 |
| Ranking | #858 | #854 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon 625 and GeForce 840M
