NVIDIA GeForce 940M vs NVIDIA Quadro M500M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs split their head-to-head benchmark results exactly one win apiece, but the margins and the workloads tell very different stories. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA GeForce 940M edges out the Quadro M500M by a razor-thin 0.5% delta, scoring 6018 against 5986. That is effectively a statistical tie, though the direction favors the consumer part. The OpenCL result aligns with the raw compute specifications, where the GeForce 940M carries a substantially larger silicon configuration. However, the more striking divergence appears in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Quadro M500M reverses the outcome decisively, posting 5222 versus 4549 for a 14.8% advantage. That is a commanding lead in a modern graphics API, and it flips the overall narrative: the professional part is not merely competitive but outright superior in Vulkan workloads.

Contextualizing these scores against the broader database reveals how close these two parts are in aggregate. The Quadro M500M holds an average benchmark score of 5604, which places it in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs. The GeForce 940M, despite winning the OpenCL test, has a lower average of 5284 and sits in the 31st percentile. The difference in average score is 320 points, roughly 6% in favor of the Quadro. This is a case where the sum of the parts exceeds the headline benchmark win: the Quadro’s Vulkan superiority is substantial enough to lift its overall standing above the GeForce, even though the GeForce wins the more traditional OpenCL test.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card reinforces the positioning. The Quadro M500M’s closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M, which scores 5501 and trails by 1.9% — the Quadro leads that comparison. It also leads the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (5508, +1.7%) and the AMD FirePro M4000 (5537, +1.2%). The only rival that beats the Quadro in this cluster is the AMD Radeon HD 8790M at 5691, which is 1.5% ahead. For the GeForce 940M, the nearest rival list is notably different: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M is actually 0.4% behind, scoring 5308, which is a surprising result given that the GTX 980M is a much higher-tier product in name. The GeForce 930A (5317, -0.6%) and GeForce 840M (5322, -0.7%) are also slightly ahead, while the GeForce GTX 760M (5236) trails by 0.9%. This suggests the 940M is clustered among older and lower-tier parts, whereas the Quadro sits slightly above its immediate rivals.

The Vulkan delta is the single most informative number in this comparison. A 14.8% lead in Vulkan is not a marginal difference; it indicates that the Quadro M500M has a meaningful architectural or driver advantage in that API. Given that both parts are Maxwell-based, the difference cannot be attributed to generation or node. It likely stems from the Quadro’s professional positioning and the associated driver optimizations for compute and graphics APIs. The OpenCL margin of 0.5% is negligible, so the verdict between these two hinges almost entirely on which API the user prioritizes.

The Verdict

From the data, the choice between these two GPUs depends on the workload. If Vulkan performance is the priority — whether for modern games, compute tasks, or professional applications that leverage that API — the NVIDIA Quadro M500M is the clear pick, offering a 14.8% advantage over the GeForce 940M. The Quadro also holds a higher average benchmark score (5604 vs 5284) and a slightly better percentile ranking (32nd vs 31st), indicating that its overall performance profile is marginally stronger despite losing the OpenCL test.

If OpenCL is the primary API, the GeForce 940M wins, but by a margin so thin (0.5%) that it is unlikely to be perceptible in real-world use. The GeForce 940M also has a higher raw FP32 throughput (1,124.4 GFLOPS vs 863.2 GFLOPS) and more shading units (512 vs 384), which could matter in theoretical peak compute scenarios. However, the benchmark results show that these theoretical advantages do not translate into a meaningful OpenCL win, and they certainly do not help in Vulkan.

For a professional or workstation context, the Quadro M500M is the safer recommendation. Its Vulkan lead and higher average score suggest better sustained performance in modern APIs, and its professional lineage (Quadro Maxwell-M generation) implies driver validation for stability-critical workloads. For a consumer laptop primarily used with OpenCL-based applications, the GeForce 940M is acceptable, but the performance gap is so small that the Quadro’s other advantages make it the better overall choice. The data does not support a strong recommendation for the GeForce 940M in any scenario where the Quadro M500M is available at a similar price point.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M500M has an average benchmark score of 5604, which is 320 points higher than the NVIDIA GeForce 940M’s 5284.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance difference between the two cards?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the Quadro M500M scores 5222 against the GeForce 940M’s 4549, resulting in a 14.8% advantage for the Quadro.

Q: Does the GeForce 940M win any benchmark against the Quadro M500M?

A: Yes, the GeForce 940M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 6018 versus 5986, a margin of only 0.5%.

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

A: The Quadro M500M leads the GeForce GTX 765M by 1.9%, the GeForce MX130 by 1.7%, and the AMD FirePro M4000 by 1.2%, but trails the AMD Radeon HD 8790M by 1.5%. The GeForce 940M trails the GeForce GTX 980M by 0.4%, the GeForce 930A by 0.6%, and the GeForce 840M by 0.7%, while leading the GeForce GTX 760M by 0.9%.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each GPU?

A: The Quadro M500M is in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, while the GeForce 940M is in the 31st percentile.

Q: Which GPU has the higher transistor count and die size?

A: The GeForce 940M has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, whereas the Quadro M500M has 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several core specifications. The GeForce 940M uses the GM107 chip, while the Quadro M500M uses the GM108S. The GeForce 940M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs, compared to the Quadro’s 384 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This gives the GeForce 940M a higher pixel rate (17.57 GPixel/s vs 8.99 GPixel/s) and texture rate (35.14 GTexel/s vs 17.98 GTexel/s). The FP32 compute also favors the GeForce 940M at 1,124.4 GFLOPS versus 863.2 GFLOPS. Clock speeds are close: the GeForce 940M runs at 1020 MHz base and 1098 MHz boost, while the Quadro M500M runs at 1029 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost. Memory configurations are identical: 2 GB DDR3, 64-bit bus, and 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The GeForce 940M has a TDP of 75 W, double the Quadro’s 30 W. The bus interface differs, with the Quadro using MXM-A (3.0) and the GeForce using MXM-B (3.0). The GeForce 940M was released on 2015-03-12, while the Quadro M500M came later on 2016-04-26.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on NVIDIA’s Maxwell architecture and manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but they are not the same silicon. The Quadro M500M uses the GM108S chip with 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.2 million per mm². The GeForce 940M uses the GM107 chip with 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, giving a slightly lower density of 12.6 million per mm². The Quadro belongs to the Quadro Maxwell-M (Mx000M) generation, while the GeForce is part of the GeForce 900M family. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and both have no ray tracing or tensor cores. The Quadro’s predecessor is the Quadro Kepler-M and its successor is the Quadro Pascal-M; the GeForce 940M’s predecessor is the GeForce 800M and its successor is the GeForce 10 Mobile. The Quadro has a lower TDP (30 W) than the GeForce (75 W), which is notable given the GeForce’s larger die and higher compute throughput. Both cards are end-of-life products with no power connectors, and their display outputs are listed as portable device dependent. The architecture differences are largely structural — the GeForce 940M is a bigger chip with more execution resources, while the Quadro M500M is a smaller, more power-efficient part that still manages to outperform in Vulkan.