Component comparison
GeForce 940M vs GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
GeForce 940M vs GeForce GTX 1050 Ti — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce 940M
Components are close in specs
B
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
- + Release year (+1)
- + VRAM (GB) (+2 GB)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+98 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+64 bit)
- + Lithography (nm) (-14 nm)
- + Transistors (M) (+1,430M)
- + Die size (mm²) (+16 mm²)
- + CUDA cores (+384)
- + TMUs (+24)
- + ROPs (+24)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+1.27 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+26.97 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+31.68 GTexel/s)
- + Energy efficiency (+9.4)
- + PassMark (overall) (+5230)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+5863)
- + Geekbench OpenCL (+14629)
- + Geekbench Vulkan (+15241)
- + Normalized score (+34.5)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce 940M
|
Component B
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2015 | 2016 (+1) |
| VRAM (GB) | 2 GB | 4 GB (+2 GB) |
| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 900 MHz | — |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 14 GB/s | 112 GB/s (+98 GB/s) |
| Memory bus (bit) | 64 bit | 128 bit (+64 bit) |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 75 W | 75 W |
| Lithography (nm) | 28 nm | 14 nm (-14 nm) |
| Transistors (M) | 1,870M | 3,300M (+1,430M) |
| Die size (mm²) | 148 mm² | 132 mm² (+16 mm²) |
| Base clock (MHz) | 1020 MHz | — |
| Boost clock (MHz) | 1098 MHz | — |
| CUDA cores | 384 | 768 (+384) |
| TMUs | 24 | 48 (+24) |
| ROPs | 8 | 32 (+24) |
| RT cores | — | — |
| Tensor cores | — | — |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 0.90 TFLOPS | 2.18 TFLOPS (+1.27 TFLOPS) |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 17.57 GPixel/s | 44.54 GPixel/s (+26.97 GPixel/s) |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 35.14 GTexel/s | 66.82 GTexel/s (+31.68 GTexel/s) |
| Energy efficiency | 6.4 | 15.8 (+9.4) |
| PassMark (overall) | 1,133 | 6,363 (+5230) |
| 3DMark Time Spy | — | 2,261 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 1,622 | 7,485 (+5863) |
| Geekbench OpenCL | 6,025 | 20,654 (+14629) |
| Geekbench Vulkan | 4,549 | 19,790 (+15241) |
| Normalized score | 6.2 | 40.8 (+34.5) |
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce 940M | GeForce GTX 1050 Ti | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alien: Isolation | 22 FPS | 122 FPS | 454.5% (B) |
| Anno 1800 | 7 FPS | 39 FPS | 457.1% (B) |
| Anno 2205 | 10 FPS | 64 FPS | 540% (B) |
| Ashes of the Singularity | 9 FPS | 29 FPS | 222.2% (B) |
| Assassin´s Creed Origins | 10 FPS | 38 FPS | 280% (B) |
| Batman: Arkham Knight | 12 FPS | 33 FPS | 175% (B) |
| Battlefield 1 | 15 FPS | 56 FPS | 273.3% (B) |
| Battlefield 5 | 17 FPS | 57 FPS | 235.3% (B) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Call of Duty Infinite Warfare | 19 FPS | 67 FPS | 252.6% (B) |
| Call of Duty WWII | 18 FPS | 63 FPS | 250% (B) |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9 FPS | 70 FPS | 677.8% (B) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5 FPS | 27 FPS | 440% (B) |
| Darksiders III | 13 FPS | 45 FPS | 246.2% (B) |
| Dirt 4 | 18 FPS | 60 FPS | 233.3% (B) |
| Dirt Rally | 21 FPS | 93 FPS | 342.9% (B) |
| Doom | 17 FPS | 68 FPS | 300% (B) |
| Dota 2 | 49 FPS | 98 FPS | 100% (B) |
| Dragon Age: Inquisition | 11 FPS | 54 FPS | 390.9% (B) |
| ELEX | 11 FPS | 42 FPS | 281.8% (B) |
| F1 2018 | 17 FPS | 56 FPS | 229.4% (B) |
| F1 2019 | 18 FPS | 63 FPS | 250% (B) |
| FIFA 17 | 43 FPS | 123 FPS | 186% (B) |
| FIFA 18 | 44 FPS | 189 FPS | 329.5% (B) |
| FIFA 19 | 34 FPS | 115 FPS | 238.2% (B) |
| Fallout 4 | 11 FPS | 54 FPS | 390.9% (B) |
| Fallout 76 | 12 FPS | 44 FPS | 266.7% (B) |
| Far Cry 5 | 11 FPS | 48 FPS | 336.4% (B) |
| Far Cry Primal | 12 FPS | 53 FPS | 341.7% (B) |
| Farming Simulator 17 | 34 FPS | 125 FPS | 267.6% (B) |
| Farming Simulator 19 | 19 FPS | 77 FPS | 305.3% (B) |
| For Honor | 14 FPS | 41 FPS | 192.9% (B) |
| Fortnite | 36 FPS | 75 FPS | 108.3% (B) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14 FPS | 67 FPS | 378.6% (B) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6 FPS | 40 FPS | 566.7% (B) |
| GRID: Autosport | 30 FPS | 117 FPS | 290% (B) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| GTA V | 14 FPS | 60 FPS | 328.6% (B) |
| Ghost Recon Wildlands | 10 FPS | 40 FPS | 300% (B) |
| Hitman 2016 | 10 FPS | 38 FPS | 280% (B) |
| Just Cause 3 | 17 FPS | 59 FPS | 247.1% (B) |
| Kingdom Come: Deliverance | 10 FPS | 38 FPS | 280% (B) |
| Mad Max | 20 FPS | 90 FPS | 350% (B) |
| Metal Gear Solid V | 16 FPS | 60 FPS | 275% (B) |
| Metro Exodus | 2 FPS | 31 FPS | 1450% (B) |
| Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor | 13 FPS | 73 FPS | 461.5% (B) |
| Mirror's Edge Catalyst | 12 FPS | 48 FPS | 300% (B) |
| Need for Speed 2016 | 16 FPS | 60 FPS | 275% (B) |
| Need for Speed Payback | 13 FPS | 55 FPS | 323.1% (B) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Rainbow Six Siege | 20 FPS | 75 FPS | 275% (B) |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 3 FPS | 24 FPS | 700% (B) |
| Resident Evil 7 | 15 FPS | 65 FPS | 333.3% (B) |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider | 10 FPS | 33 FPS | 230% (B) |
| Rocket League | 24 FPS | 106 FPS | 341.7% (B) |
| Star Wars Battlefront | 13 FPS | 72 FPS | 453.8% (B) |
| Star Wars Battlefront 2 | 13 FPS | 50 FPS | 284.6% (B) |
| Star Wars Jedi Fallen Order | 11 FPS | 47 FPS | 327.3% (B) |
| The Crew 2 | 11 FPS | 46 FPS | 318.2% (B) |
| The Division | 10 FPS | 43 FPS | 330% (B) |
| The Witcher 3 | 10 FPS | 46 FPS | 360% (B) |
| The Witcher 3 | 10 FPS | 21 FPS | 110% (B) |
| Titanfall 2 | 18 FPS | 62 FPS | 244.4% (B) |
| Valorant | 40 FPS | 110 FPS | 175% (B) |
| World of Warships | 37 FPS | 94 FPS | 154.1% (B) |
| XCOM 2 | 7 FPS | 38 FPS | 442.9% (B) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti wins 19 of the comparable criteria.
The choice depends on your use case.
🤔 How to choose
Universal advice for any use case.
- Reliability vs price: reliability (median 50) ↔ price (median 385.1).
- Weight vs CPU: mobility (median 48) ↔ overall performance (median 49.8).
- Upgradeability vs battery: upgradability (median 50) ↔ battery life (median 2.8).