AMD Radeon 610M vs NVIDIA GeForce 940M Comparison

# AMD Radeon 610M vs NVIDIA GeForce 940M

The AMD Radeon 610M and NVIDIA GeForce 940M are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions, but they represent entirely different eras of GPU design. The data shows a near-total split: NVIDIA wins OpenCL by a wide margin, while AMD dominates Vulkan by an even larger one. Their average benchmark scores are separated by just 160 points (5444 vs 5284), placing both in the bottom third of all GPUs (32nd and 31st percentiles). This is not a contest of raw superiority—it is a matter of API preference and workload type.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 610M leads with an average benchmark score of 5444, compared to 5284 for the NVIDIA GeForce 940M. That is a 3.0% gap in AMD's favor, despite NVIDIA winning one of the two individual tests.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance difference?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the AMD Radeon 610M scores 6353 against 4549 for the NVIDIA GeForce 940M, a 39.7% advantage for AMD. This is the single largest performance delta between the two cards.

Q: What about OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 940M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test decisively, scoring 6018 versus 4535 for the AMD Radeon 610M, a 24.6% lead. The data indicates NVIDIA holds a strong edge in OpenCL compute workloads.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Radeon 610M sits within 1% of the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (5467), AMD Radeon R7 M365X (5416), AMD Radeon R7 M440 (5483), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M (5501). The NVIDIA GeForce 940M is similarly clustered, with a 0.9% lead over the GeForce GTX 760M (5236) and within 0.7% of the GeForce 930A (5317) and GeForce 840M (5322).

Q: Which GPU has the lower power draw?

A: The AMD Radeon 610M has a 15 W TDP, while the NVIDIA GeForce 940M draws 75 W. The AMD part is an integrated graphics processor (IGP), whereas NVIDIA uses an MXM module.

Q: What are the architectural generations of these two chips?

A: The AMD Radeon 610M is built on RDNA 2.0 (Mendocino, 6 nm), while the NVIDIA GeForce 940M uses Maxwell (GM107, 28 nm). AMD's chip is part of the Navi II IGP generation, and NVIDIA's belongs to the GeForce 900M series.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 610M wins in Vulkan-based applications and modern API scenarios. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 6353 is not just ahead of the 940M—it is 39.7% higher, which is a substantial margin for any GPU comparison. This suggests the RDNA 2.0 architecture handles Vulkan's low-level overhead and draw-call efficiency far better than Maxwell. For users running Vulkan titles or compute workloads that leverage this API, the 610M is the clear choice.

The NVIDIA GeForce 940M wins in OpenCL environments. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 6018 beats the 610M's 4535 by 24.6%. This is a decisive victory in a well-established compute API. The 940M's 512 shading units and 32 texture mapping units provide raw parallelism that the 610M's 128 shading units cannot match, and the data confirms this in OpenCL's compute-centric workload.

The split is clean: Vulkan favors AMD, OpenCL favors NVIDIA. There is no overlap in the benchmark results—each card dominates one API completely. For legacy OpenCL applications, the 940M holds a clear advantage; for modern Vulkan workloads, the 610M is significantly faster. The average scores reflect this balance, with AMD's 5444 edging NVIDIA's 5284 due to the larger magnitude of the Vulkan win.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 610M is built on RDNA 2.0 architecture using a 6 nm TSMC process, while the NVIDIA GeForce 940M uses the Maxwell architecture on a 28 nm TSMC process. This is a massive generational leap in manufacturing—the 6 nm node allows AMD to pack the chip into a 100 mm² die, whereas NVIDIA's GM107 requires 148 mm². The NVIDIA chip contains 1,870 million transistors with a density of 12.6 million per mm², while the AMD chip's transistor count is not listed.

The AMD Radeon 610M features 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 4 render output units (ROPs). It also includes 2 ray tracing cores, which the NVIDIA GeForce 940M lacks entirely. The NVIDIA part has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs—exactly four times the AMD part in each category. This explains the NVIDIA card's higher pixel rate (17.57 GPixel/s vs 7.600 GPixel/s) and texture rate (35.14 GTexel/s vs 15.20 GTexel/s).

Memory configuration differs fundamentally. The 610M uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the 940M has dedicated 2 GB DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card's FP32 performance is 486.4 GFLOPS, and it supports FP16 at 972.8 GFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The NVIDIA card's FP32 is 1,124.4 GFLOPS, with no FP16 data listed.

The AMD chip supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while NVIDIA only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The 610M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the 940M uses MXM-B (3.0). The AMD part is an IGP with no power connectors, and the NVIDIA card is an MXM module—also with no power connectors.

Specification Differences

The most striking specification difference is TDP: the AMD Radeon 610M draws 15 W, versus 75 W for the NVIDIA GeForce 940M. That is a 5x power draw difference, making the 610M dramatically more efficient for thin-and-light laptops.

Clock speeds also diverge significantly. The AMD card has a base clock of 1500 MHz and boost of 1900 MHz, while NVIDIA runs at 1020 MHz base and 1098 MHz boost. The NVIDIA memory clock is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), whereas AMD's memory clock is system-shared.

Process node: 6 nm (AMD) vs 28 nm (NVIDIA). Die size: 100 mm² vs 148 mm². Transistor density: not listed for AMD, 12.6M / mm² for NVIDIA. The 610M has 2 ray tracing cores; the 940M has none.

Memory: 2 GB DDR3 (NVIDIA) vs system-shared (AMD). Bus width: 64-bit (NVIDIA) vs system-shared. Bandwidth: 14.40 GB/s (NVIDIA) vs system-dependent.

Shading units: 128 vs 512. TMUs: 8 vs 32. ROPs: 4 vs 16. Pixel rate: 7.600 vs 17.57 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 15.20 vs 35.14 GTexel/s. FP32: 486.4 vs 1,124.4 GFLOPS.

Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 (AMD) vs MXM-B 3.0 (NVIDIA). Release dates: 2022-09-19 (AMD) vs 2015-03-12 (NVIDIA). Predecessors: Vega II IGP (AMD) vs GeForce 800M (NVIDIA). Successors: Navi III IGP (AMD) vs GeForce 10 Mobile (NVIDIA).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test is a clear win for the NVIDIA GeForce 940M. NVIDIA scores 6018 against AMD's 4535, a delta of -24.6% from AMD's perspective. This is a decisive margin that aligns with the raw compute specifications: NVIDIA's 512 shading units and 1,124.4 GFLOPS FP32 performance are more than double AMD's 128 units and 486.4 GFLOPS. OpenCL workloads that scale with shading unit count will favor the 940M substantially.

The Geekbench Vulkan test flips the result completely. The AMD Radeon 610M scores 6353 versus 4549 for NVIDIA, a 39.7% advantage. This is a larger margin than NVIDIA's OpenCL win, which is why AMD's average score ends up higher. The Vulkan result is surprising given NVIDIA's hardware advantage, but the data is unambiguous. The RDNA 2.0 architecture's modern design—including 2 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support—likely contributes to better Vulkan driver efficiency and lower API overhead.

The head-to-head tally is 1 win each, but the magnitudes differ. AMD's Vulkan win is 39.7%, while NVIDIA's OpenCL win is 24.6%. This asymmetry explains the average score gap: 5444 vs 5284. The data shows that AMD's stronger Vulkan performance outweighs NVIDIA's OpenCL edge in the aggregate scoring.

When comparing to their nearest rivals, both GPUs are tightly clustered. The 610M's nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro M4000, scores 5467—just 0.4% above AMD. The 940M's closest rival, the GeForce GTX 760M, scores 5236—0.9% below NVIDIA. Neither card breaks away from its peer group, suggesting both are mid-pack performers within their respective generations.

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon 610M is the pick for Vulkan-centric workloads and power-sensitive designs. Its 39.7% lead in Geekbench Vulkan is the single largest performance gap in this comparison, and its 15 W TDP makes it vastly more suitable for thin, fanless, or battery-optimized laptops. The 2 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support indicate modern API readiness that the 940M cannot match. For users running Vulkan games or compute, the 610M's 6353 score is decisive.

The NVIDIA GeForce 940M is the pick for OpenCL-heavy applications and raw compute throughput. Its 6018 OpenCL score beats AMD by 24.6%, and the 512 shading units provide more parallel execution resources. The dedicated 2 GB DDR3 memory with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth also offers a fixed memory pool, unlike AMD's system-shared configuration. For legacy OpenCL software or workloads that favor NVIDIA's compute stack, the 940M remains competitive despite its older architecture.

The average benchmark data favors AMD overall (5444 vs 5284), but the choice depends entirely on API priority. Neither card is a general-purpose winner—each excels in one domain and loses in the other. The 610M's modern architecture and efficiency make it the better long-term investment for new software, while the 940M's raw compute power serves older applications. Given the 75 W TDP difference and 7-year gap in release dates, the AMD Radeon 610M is the more balanced recommendation for most users, provided their software stack supports Vulkan.