NVIDIA GeForce 940M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce 940M and NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 represent two distinct eras of NVIDIA mobile and desktop GPU design, separated by nearly five years of architectural evolution. The data shows a clear overall winner in the GeForce 940M, which posts an average benchmark score of 5,284 compared to the GTS 450's 4,893, placing the 940M at the 31st percentile of all GPUs versus the 28th percentile for the GTS 450. Despite the GTS 450's larger memory bus and faster GDDR5 memory, the 940M's modern Maxwell architecture and higher shader count deliver superior compute performance, making it the more capable part for general-purpose and OpenCL workloads. The GTS 450, however, remains a notable piece of hardware history with its own unique characteristics, including a higher TDP and a physical card design that contrasts sharply with the 940M's mobile MXM form factor.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the GeForce 940M wins the only head-to-head test available, outperforming the GTS 450 by a 23% margin in Geekbench OpenCL. This translates to a score of 6,018 for the 940M versus 4,893 for the GTS 450, a substantial gap that reflects the generational leap from Fermi to Maxwell. For users choosing between these two, the 940M is the clear pick for any compute-intensive task, OpenCL acceleration, or modern API support, as it also offers Vulkan 1.4 support while the GTS 450 has no Vulkan capability listed. The GTS 450, with its launch MSRP of 129 USD, was an entry-level desktop card in its day, but the data shows it now sits behind the 940M in raw performance. There is no benchmark category where the GTS 450 wins, so the verdict is straightforward: the 940M is the superior choice for anyone prioritizing performance and modern feature support. The GTS 450 might be chosen only for legacy system compatibility or historical collection purposes, not for competitive performance.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce 940M wins the only benchmark category where both are tested, which is Geekbench OpenCL. This test measures general-purpose compute performance across a wide range of workloads, and the 940M's 6,018 score versus 4,893 for the GTS 450 indicates a meaningful advantage in tasks that leverage GPU acceleration beyond graphics rendering. This includes applications like video encoding, image processing, and scientific simulations that use OpenCL. The 940M also wins on architectural features: it supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GTS 450 lists no Vulkan support, making the 940M the only viable option for modern cross-platform graphics APIs. The GTS 450, meanwhile, has no wins in any benchmark category, but it does hold advantages in specific hardware specifications that do not translate to benchmark victories. Its memory bandwidth of 57.73 GB/s is dramatically higher than the 940M's 14.40 GB/s, and its 128-bit memory bus is twice as wide, which could theoretically benefit certain memory-bound workloads, though the benchmark data does not show this translating into a win. The GTS 450's higher TDP of 106 W also suggests it has more power headroom, but again, this does not manifest in better scores.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is significant. The 940M is built on the Maxwell architecture using the GM107 chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the GTS 450 uses the older Fermi architecture with the GF106 chip on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. This process shrink allows the 940M to pack 1,870 million transistors into a 148 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 12.6M per mm². In contrast, the GTS 450 has 1,170 million transistors spread across a much larger 238 mm² die, yielding a density of just 4.9M per mm². This nearly threefold difference in transistor density explains how the 940M can offer 512 shading units compared to just 192 on the GTS 450, despite having similar TMU and ROP counts (32 and 16 respectively for both). The 940M also features higher clock speeds with a base of 1020 MHz and boost of 1098 MHz, whereas the GTS 450 has no listed base or boost clocks, only a memory clock of 902 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective). The memory configurations are starkly different: the 940M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, while the GTS 450 uses 1 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. This gives the GTS 450 a massive bandwidth advantage (57.73 GB/s vs 14.40 GB/s), but the 940M compensates with higher compute throughput. The 940M's FP32 performance is 1,124.4 GFLOPS, nearly double the GTS 450's 601.3 GFLOPS. The 940M is also more power-efficient, with a 75 W TDP versus 106 W for the GTS 450, and it uses an MXM module slot with no power connectors, while the GTS 450 is a dual-slot card requiring a 6-pin connector and a 300 W PSU.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The GeForce 940M has significantly higher FP32 performance at 1,124.4 GFLOPS compared to the GTS 450's 601.3 GFLOPS, and it also wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a 23% margin.

Q: Does the GTS 450 have any advantage in memory specifications?

A: Yes, the GTS 450 uses faster GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 57.73 GB/s of bandwidth, while the 940M uses DDR3 on a 64-bit bus for only 14.40 GB/s. However, this does not translate into a benchmark win.

Q: What is the difference in API support?

A: The 940M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTS 450 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The 940M has a 75 W TDP and uses an MXM module with no power connectors, while the GTS 450 has a 106 W TDP, requires a 6-pin power connector, and needs a 300 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which GPU is physically larger?

A: The GTS 450 is a dual-slot desktop card measuring 210 mm in length and 111 mm in height, whereas the 940M is an MXM module with no listed dimensions, designed for portable devices.

Q: What are their respective production statuses and release dates?

A: Both are end-of-life products. The GTS 450 was released on 2010-09-12, and the 940M was released on 2015-03-12, with the 940M succeeding the GeForce 800M and preceding the GeForce 10 Mobile, while the GTS 450 succeeded the GeForce 200 and preceded the GeForce 500.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are decisive. The GeForce 940M scores 6,018, while the GTS 450 scores 4,893, giving the 940M a 23% advantage. This is a substantial margin that underscores the generational improvement in compute capability. To put this in context, the 940M's average benchmark score of 5,284 places it just 0.4% behind the GeForce GTX 980M (5,308) and 0.9% ahead of the GeForce GTX 760M (5,236). The GTS 450's average score of 4,893 puts it 0.2% behind the GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4,901) and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX (4,867). This means the 940M sits in a performance tier that is competitive with older GTX mobile parts, while the GTS 450 is clustered with much newer entry-level and integrated-class GPUs. The 23% delta in the head-to-head test is the single most important data point, as it shows that despite the GTS 450's superior memory bandwidth, the 940M's higher shader count, clock speeds, and architectural efficiency dominate in compute workloads. The 940M also achieves this with lower power consumption (75 W vs 106 W), making it a more efficient performer.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every major specification category. The 940M uses a 28 nm process, while the GTS 450 uses a 40 nm process. The 940M has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, while the GTS 450 has 1,170 million on a 238 mm² die. Transistor density is 12.6M per mm² for the 940M versus 4.9M per mm² for the GTS 450. The 940M has a base clock of 1020 MHz and boost of 1098 MHz, while the GTS 450 has no base or boost clocks listed; its memory clock is 902 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) versus 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) for the 940M. Memory size is 2 GB for the 940M versus 1 GB for the GTS 450, with DDR3 versus GDDR5 types, and bus widths of 64-bit versus 128-bit. Bandwidth is 14.40 GB/s for the 940M versus 57.73 GB/s for the GTS 450. Shading units are 512 versus 192, while TMUs and ROPs are identical at 32 and 16 each. Pixel rate is 17.57 GPixel/s for the 940M versus 6.264 GPixel/s for the GTS 450, and texture rate is 35.14 GTexel/s versus 25.06 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,124.4 GFLOPS versus 601.3 GFLOPS. TDP is 75 W versus 106 W. The 940M uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface and is an MXM Module, while the GTS 450 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 and is a dual-slot card. Power connectors are none for the 940M versus 1x 6-pin for the GTS 450, and the GTS 450 has a suggested PSU of 300 W. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the 940M versus 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a for the GTS 450. The GTS 450 has dimensions of 210 mm x 111 mm, while the 940M has none listed. The GTS 450 has a launch MSRP of 129 USD, while the 940M has none. The 940M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GTS 450 does not list Vulkan support.