NVIDIA GeForce 940MX vs NVIDIA Quadro K3100M Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M and NVIDIA GeForce 940MX are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from NVIDIA, but they target very different segments of the laptop market. The Quadro K3100M is a professional workstation GPU built on the Kepler architecture, while the GeForce 940MX is a consumer-oriented chip using the newer Maxwell architecture. Benchmark data shows the Quadro K3100M holds a decisive performance lead in the two available head-to-head tests, but the 940MX counters with significantly higher power efficiency and a more modern feature set. This analysis breaks down the architectural differences, benchmark results, and specification gaps between these two mobile GPUs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M wins both head-to-head tests. It scores 6,154 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 4,939 for the GeForce 940MX, a 24.6% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Quadro K3100M scores 5,484 against 4,749, a 15.5% lead.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Quadro K3100M has an average benchmark score of 5,154, placing it in the 30th percentile of all GPUs. The GeForce 940MX averages 4,844, which puts it in the 28th percentile. The Quadro K3100M sits 6.4% above the 940MX in average score.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The GeForce 940MX has a 23 W TDP, while the Quadro K3100M is rated at 75 W. This means the 940MX draws less than one-third of the power of the Quadro K3100M, making it substantially more efficient for thin-and-light laptops.

Q: Which GPU has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The Quadro K3100M comes with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The GeForce 940MX has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, providing only 40.10 GB/s. The Quadro K3100M offers double the capacity and over 2.5 times the bandwidth.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each GPU?

A: For the Quadro K3100M, the nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M260X at 5,161 average score, just 0.1% ahead. The GeForce 940MX's closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M at 4,855, which is 0.2% behind the 940MX.

Q: Which architecture is newer?

A: The GeForce 940MX uses the Maxwell architecture (GM107 chip) and was released in 2016, while the Quadro K3100M uses the older Kepler architecture (GK104 chip) from 2013. The 940MX supports Vulkan 1.4, whereas the Quadro K3100M is limited to Vulkan 1.2.175.

Architecture Differences

The Quadro K3100M is built on the Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 3,540 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. The GeForce 940MX uses the Maxwell architecture with the GM107 chip, also on TSMC's 28 nm node, but with just 1,870 million transistors on a much smaller 148 mm² die, achieving a slightly higher density of 12.6 million per square millimeter.

The Quadro K3100M belongs to the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) generation, while the 940MX is part of the GeForce 900M family. The Quadro K3100M's predecessor is Quadro Fermi-M and its successor is Quadro Maxwell-M. The GeForce 940MX succeeded the GeForce 800M and was followed by GeForce 10 Mobile.

Clock speeds reveal a key difference: the Quadro K3100M runs at a static 706 MHz for both base and boost, with memory at 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective). The GeForce 940MX has a base clock of 795 MHz and a boost clock of 861 MHz, with faster memory at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). Despite the 940MX's higher clocks, the Quadro K3100M compensates with far more execution resources.

The Quadro K3100M contains 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation pipelines. The GeForce 940MX has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. This disparity in raw hardware resources explains why the Quadro K3100M achieves pixel and texture rates of 11.30 GPixel/s and 45.18 GTexel/s, respectively, versus 6.888 GPixel/s and 27.55 GTexel/s for the 940MX.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the 940MX supports Vulkan 1.4 compared to Vulkan 1.2.175 on the Quadro K3100M. Neither chip includes ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The Quadro K3100M uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, while the 940MX uses PCIe 3.0 x8, reflecting their different laptop integration targets.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data clearly favors the Quadro K3100M in both available tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro K3100M scores 6,154 against the GeForce 940MX's 4,939. This 24.6% delta is substantial and reflects the Quadro K3100M's superior compute resources — 768 shading units versus 512, and over 2.5 times the memory bandwidth.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows a closer but still decisive margin. The Quadro K3100M scores 5,484, while the GeForce 940MX manages 4,749, a 15.5% difference. The smaller gap in Vulkan may be attributable to the 940MX's more modern architecture and better Vulkan support (version 1.4 versus 1.2.175), which could partially offset its hardware disadvantage.

The Quadro K3100M's wins in both tests gives it a 2-0 record in head-to-head comparisons. Its average benchmark score of 5,154 is 6.4% higher than the 940MX's 4,844. This places the Quadro K3100M in the 30th percentile of all GPUs, slightly above the 940MX's 28th percentile.

Looking at nearest rivals provides context. The Quadro K3100M's closest competitor, the AMD Radeon R7 M260X, scores 5,161 — just 0.1% higher. The Quadro K3100M also edges out the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M (5,211, 1.1% ahead) and the GeForce GTX 760M (5,236, 1.6% ahead), while beating the AMD Radeon R7 240 (5,063) by 1.8%. The GeForce 940MX trades blows with its rivals: it trails the GeForce GTX 560M by 0.2% (4,855 vs 4,844) and the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX by 0.5% (4,867), but beats the GeForce GTS 450 by 1% (4,893) and the GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB by 1.1% (4,791).

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance winner: the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M. It outperforms the GeForce 940MX by 24.6% in OpenCL and 15.5% in Vulkan, with a 6.4% higher average benchmark score. For any workload that stresses compute performance, memory bandwidth, or pixel throughput, the Quadro K3100M is the superior choice. Its 4 GB memory capacity and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provide a substantial advantage over the 940MX's 2 GB and 40.10 GB/s, making it better suited for large datasets or multi-display professional work.

However, the GeForce 940MX is not without merits. Its 23 W TDP is less than a third of the Quadro K3100M's 75 W rating, making it dramatically more power-efficient. This efficiency enables thinner, lighter laptops with longer battery life. The 940MX also has a more modern architecture (Maxwell versus Kepler), higher clock speeds (861 MHz boost versus 706 MHz), and better Vulkan support (1.4 versus 1.2.175). For consumer tasks like casual gaming or media playback, the 940MX offers adequate performance with far less power draw.

The choice depends on the use case. Professional users who need maximum compute performance, higher memory capacity, and greater bandwidth should select the Quadro K3100M, accepting its higher power consumption. Users prioritizing portability, battery life, and modern API support should pick the GeForce 940MX, even though it is slower. The Quadro K3100M also benefits from being in the 30th percentile versus the 940MX's 28th, indicating slightly better overall positioning among all GPUs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro K3100M | NVIDIA GeForce 940MX |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Kepler | Maxwell |

| Chip | GK104 | GM107 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 1,870 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 148 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.0M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 706 MHz | 795 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 706 MHz | 861 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective) | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 40.10 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 512 |

| TMUs | 64 | 32 |

| ROPs | 32 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 11.30 GPixel/s | 6.888 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 45.18 GTexel/s | 27.55 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1,084.4 GFLOPS | 881.7 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 75 W | 23 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Generation | Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) | GeForce 900M |

| Release Date | 2013-07-22 | 2016-06-27 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Fermi-M | GeForce 800M |

| Successor | Quadro Maxwell-M | GeForce 10 Mobile |