Radeon R9 295X2 vs CMP 40HX
Radeon R9 295X2
Popular choices:
CMP 40HX
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar CMP 40HX
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 | Radeon R9 295X2 | CMP 40HX |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | 🎮 High Capacity (4 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (307mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 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 | Radeon R9 295X2 | CMP 40HX |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+67%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) | ✅More affordable ($120) |
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 R9 295X2 and CMP 40HX
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.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 295X2 scores 8,734 and the CMP 40HX reaches 8,749 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 295X2 is built on GCN 2.0 while the CMP 40HX uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,816 (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 2,304 (CMP 40HX). Raw compute: 5.733 TFLOPS ×2 (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 7.603 TFLOPS (CMP 40HX). Boost clocks: 1018 MHz vs 1650 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | CMP 40HX |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,734 | 8,749 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 2816 ×2+22% | 2304 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.733 TFLOPS ×2 | 7.603 TFLOPS+33% |
| Boost Clock | 1018 MHz | 1650 MHz+62% |
| ROPs | 64 ×2 | 64 |
| TMUs | 176 ×2+22% | 144 |
| L1 Cache | 0.69 MB | 2.3 MB+233% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | CMP 40HX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 R9 295X2 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the CMP 40HX has 4 GB. The Radeon R9 295X2 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 512-bit x2 vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 4 MB (CMP 40HX) — the CMP 40HX has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | CMP 40HX |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 512-bit x2+300% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 12 Ultimate (CMP 40HX). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 0.
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | CMP 40HX |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12 Ultimate |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.2+9% |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.6+7% |
| Max Displays | 6 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 295X2) vs No (CMP 40HX). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs No.
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | CMP 40HX |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | No |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | No |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 295X2 draws 500W versus the CMP 40HX's 185W — a 92% difference. The CMP 40HX is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 1000W (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 500W (CMP 40HX). Power connectors: 2x 8-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 307mm vs 229mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 65°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | CMP 40HX |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 500W | 185W-63% |
| Recommended PSU | 1000W | 500W-50% |
| Power Connector | 2x 8-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 307mm | 229mm |
| Height | 114mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 65°C-19% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 17.5 | 47.3+170% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 295X2 launched at $1499 MSRP and currently averages $200, while the CMP 40HX launched at $699 and now averages $120. The CMP 40HX costs 40% less ($80 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 43.7 (Radeon R9 295X2) vs 72.9 (CMP 40HX) — the CMP 40HX offers 66.8% better value. The CMP 40HX is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2014).
| Feature | Radeon R9 295X2 | CMP 40HX |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1499 | $699-53% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $200 | $120-40% |
| Performance per Dollar | 43.7 | 72.9+67% |
| Codename | Vesuvius | TU106 |
| Release | April 29 2014 | February 25 2021 |
| Ranking | #303 | #302 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R9 295X2 and CMP 40HX
