CPU
GPU
Radeon R9 M275
Popular choices:
GeForce 940A
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 R9 M275 is positioned at rank 543 and the GeForce 940A is on rank 320, 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 Radeon R9 M275
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 940A
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 | Radeon R9 M275 | GeForce 940A |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑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 | — | — |
💎 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 | Radeon R9 M275 | GeForce 940A |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+272.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300) | ✅More affordable ($80) |
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 M275 and GeForce 940A
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.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 M275 scores 1,115 and the GeForce 940A reaches 1,107 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 M275 is built on GCN 1.0 while the GeForce 940A uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 640 (Radeon R9 M275) vs 384 (GeForce 940A). Raw compute: 1.184 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M275) vs 0.8632 TFLOPS (GeForce 940A). Boost clocks: 925 MHz vs 1124 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275 | GeForce 940A |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,115 | 1,107 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640+67% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.184 TFLOPS+37% | 0.8632 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 925 MHz | 1124 MHz+22% |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 40+150% | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB | 192 KB+20% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275 | GeForce 940A |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Radeon R9 M275) vs 1 MB (GeForce 940A) — the GeForce 940A has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275 | GeForce 940A |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 64 GB/s | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FL11_1) (Radeon R9 M275) vs 11.0 (GeForce 940A). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.1 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 1.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275 | GeForce 940A |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (FL11_1)+9% | 11.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.1 | 4.6+12% |
| Max Displays | 6+500% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: UVD3 (Radeon R9 M275) vs NVENC 2 (GeForce 940A). Decoder: VCE vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,Flash (Radeon R9 M275) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 (GeForce 940A).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275 | GeForce 940A |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | UVD3 | NVENC 2 |
| Decoder | VCE | PureVideo HD VP6 |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,Flash | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 M275 draws 75W versus the GeForce 940A's 33W — a 77.8% difference. The GeForce 940A is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R9 M275) vs 350W (GeForce 940A). Power connectors: Mobile vs Legacy. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275 | GeForce 940A |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 33W-56% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | Legacy |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 75°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 14.9 | 33.5+125% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 M275 launched at $300 MSRP and currently averages $300, while the GeForce 940A launched at $80 and now averages $80. The GeForce 940A costs 73.3% less ($220 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 3.7 (Radeon R9 M275) vs 13.8 (GeForce 940A) — the GeForce 940A offers 273% better value. The GeForce 940A is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275 | GeForce 940A |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $300 | $80-73% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $300 | $80-73% |
| Performance per Dollar | 3.7 | 13.8+273% |
| Codename | Venus | GM108 |
| Release | January 28 2014 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #851 | #853 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R9 M275 and GeForce 940A
