Component comparison
GeForce RTX 5060 vs GeForce 940M
GeForce RTX 5060 vs GeForce 940M — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce RTX 5060
- + Release year (+10)
- + VRAM (GB) (+6 GB)
- + Memory clock (MHz) (+600 MHz)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+434 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+64 bit)
- + Lithography (nm) (-23 nm)
- + Transistors (M) (+20,030M)
- + CUDA cores (+3456)
- + TMUs (+96)
- + ROPs (+40)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+18.28 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+102.33 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+264.46 GTexel/s)
- + Energy efficiency (+62.8)
- + PassMark (overall) (+15616)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+29744)
- + Normalized score (+44.0)
B
GeForce 940M
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+30 W)
- + Die size (mm²) (+33 mm²)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce RTX 5060
|
Component B
GeForce 940M
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2025 (+10) | 2015 |
| VRAM (GB) | 8 GB (+6 GB) | 2 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR7 | DDR3 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 1500 MHz (+600 MHz) | 900 MHz |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 448 GB/s (+434 GB/s) | 14 GB/s |
| Memory bus (bit) | 128 bit (+64 bit) | 64 bit |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 45 W | 75 W (+30 W) |
| Lithography (nm) | 5 nm (-23 nm) | 28 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 21,900M (+20,030M) | 1,870M |
| Die size (mm²) | 181 mm² | 148 mm² (+33 mm²) |
| Base clock (MHz) | — | 1020 MHz |
| Boost clock (MHz) | — | 1098 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 3,840 (+3456) | 384 |
| TMUs | 120 (+96) | 24 |
| ROPs | 48 (+40) | 8 |
| RT cores | 30 | — |
| Tensor cores | 120 | — |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 19.18 TFLOPS (+18.28 TFLOPS) | 0.90 TFLOPS |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 119.90 GPixel/s (+102.33 GPixel/s) | 17.57 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 299.60 GTexel/s (+264.46 GTexel/s) | 35.14 GTexel/s |
| Energy efficiency | 69.2 (+62.8) | 6.4 |
| PassMark (overall) | 16,749 (+15616) | 1,133 |
| 3DMark Time Spy | — | — |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 31,366 (+29744) | 1,622 |
| Geekbench OpenCL | — | 6,025 |
| Geekbench Vulkan | — | 4,549 |
| Normalized score | 50.3 (+44.0) | 6.2 |
Only in component A
DLSS
ReBAR
ray_tracing
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce RTX 5060 | GeForce 940M | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battlefield 5 | 130 FPS | 17 FPS | +664.7% (A) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 220 FPS | 9 FPS | +2344.4% (A) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 95 FPS | 5 FPS | +1800% (A) |
| Far Cry 5 | 130 FPS | 11 FPS | +1081.8% (A) |
| Fortnite | 170 FPS | 36 FPS | +372.2% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 150 FPS | 14 FPS | +971.4% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 255 FPS | 6 FPS | +4150% (A) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Metro Exodus | 95 FPS | 2 FPS | +4650% (A) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 110 FPS | 3 FPS | +3566.7% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 140 FPS | 10 FPS | +1300% (A) |
| Valorant | 230 FPS | 40 FPS | +475% (A) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 5060 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).