Component comparison
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti vs GeForce 940M
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti vs GeForce 940M — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti
- + Release year (+6)
- + VRAM (GB) (+10 GB)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+898 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+320 bit)
- + Lithography (nm) (-20 nm)
- + Transistors (M) (+26,430M)
- + CUDA cores (+9856)
- + TMUs (+296)
- + ROPs (+104)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+33.20 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+168.93 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+497.66 GTexel/s)
- + Energy efficiency (+7.8)
- + PassMark (overall) (+25627)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+45491)
- + Geekbench OpenCL (+203056)
- + Normalized score (+60.1)
B
GeForce 940M
- + Die size (mm²) (+480 mm²)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti
|
Component B
GeForce 940M
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2021 (+6) | 2015 |
| VRAM (GB) | 12 GB (+10 GB) | 2 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR6X | DDR3 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | — | 900 MHz |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 912 GB/s (+898 GB/s) | 14 GB/s |
| Memory bus (bit) | 384 bit (+320 bit) | 64 bit |
| TGP / TDP (W) | — | 75 W |
| Lithography (nm) | 8 nm (-20 nm) | 28 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 28,300M (+26,430M) | 1,870M |
| Die size (mm²) | 628 mm² | 148 mm² (+480 mm²) |
| Base clock (MHz) | — | 1020 MHz |
| Boost clock (MHz) | — | 1098 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 10,240 (+9856) | 384 |
| TMUs | 320 (+296) | 24 |
| ROPs | 112 (+104) | 8 |
| RT cores | 80 | — |
| Tensor cores | 320 | — |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 34.10 TFLOPS (+33.20 TFLOPS) | 0.90 TFLOPS |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 186.50 GPixel/s (+168.93 GPixel/s) | 17.57 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 532.80 GTexel/s (+497.66 GTexel/s) | 35.14 GTexel/s |
| Energy efficiency | 14.2 (+7.8) | 6.4 |
| PassMark (overall) | 26,760 (+25627) | 1,133 |
| 3DMark Time Spy | — | — |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 47,113 (+45491) | 1,622 |
| Geekbench OpenCL | 209,081 (+203056) | 6,025 |
| Geekbench Vulkan | — | 4,549 |
| Normalized score | 66.3 (+60.1) | 6.2 |
Only in component A
DLSS
ReBAR
ray_tracing
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce RTX 3080 Ti | GeForce 940M | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battlefield 5 | 170 FPS | 17 FPS | +900% (A) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 300 FPS | 9 FPS | +3233.3% (A) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 219 FPS | 5 FPS | +4280% (A) |
| Dota 2 | 234 FPS | 49 FPS | +377.6% (A) |
| Far Cry 5 | 208 FPS | 11 FPS | +1790.9% (A) |
| Fortnite | 300 FPS | 36 FPS | +733.3% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 250 FPS | 14 FPS | +1685.7% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 200 FPS | 6 FPS | +3233.3% (A) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| GTA V | 153 FPS | 14 FPS | +992.9% (A) |
| Metro Exodus | 172 FPS | 2 FPS | +8500% (A) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 190 FPS | 3 FPS | +6233.3% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 372 FPS | 10 FPS | +3620% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 144 FPS | 10 FPS | +1340% (A) |
| Valorant | 350 FPS | 40 FPS | +775% (A) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti wins 17 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).