NVIDIA GeForce 840M vs NVIDIA Quadro M500M Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro M500M and NVIDIA GeForce 840M share the same GM108S chip, Maxwell architecture, and nearly identical core configurations, yet they target different market segments. The Quadro M500M edges ahead in synthetic benchmarks, while the GeForce 840M holds a slight memory bandwidth advantage. Both are end-of-life mobile parts, but the data reveals distinct positioning: one is a professional-grade MXM module, the other an integrated GeForce part for consumer laptops.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL workloads?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M500M scores 5986 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce 840M scores 5764. This gives the Quadro a 3.9% lead in that test.

Q: How do the two compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The Quadro M500M wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 5222 versus 4880 for the GeForce 840M, a 7% advantage.

Q: Are the core specifications identical between the two?

A: Yes, both feature 384 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, and identical clock speeds of 1029 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The GeForce 840M has 16.02 GB/s bandwidth, while the Quadro M500M has 14.40 GB/s. The GeForce leads by roughly 11% despite the same memory type and bus width.

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Quadro M500M averages 5604 across all tests, compared to 5322 for the GeForce 840M. The Quadro also holds a higher percentile rank at 32 versus 31 for the GeForce.

Q: How do their nearest rivals compare?

A: The Quadro M500M sits 1.2% above the AMD FirePro M4000 and 1.9% above the GeForce GTX 765M. The GeForce 840M is 0.1% above the GeForce 930A and 0.7% above the GeForce 940M.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same GM108S chip using TSMC's 28 nm process, with 1,020 million transistors packed into a 77 mm² die. The transistor density calculates to 13.2 million transistors per square millimeter for both parts. This means the fundamental compute architecture is identical — 384 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units are present on each chip, delivering the same theoretical pixel rate of 8.992 GPixel/s and texture rate of 17.98 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance is also equal at 863.2 GFLOPS for FP32 operations.

The differences emerge in packaging and platform integration. The Quadro M500M uses an MXM-A (3.0) bus interface and comes as an MXM Module, which is a removable graphics card form factor typically found in professional mobile workstations. The GeForce 840M, by contrast, uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface and is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor), meaning it is typically soldered onto the motherboard in consumer laptops. Both require no external power connectors and have display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent," but the slot width differs — the Quadro is an MXM Module while the GeForce is an IGP.

Memory clocks diverge slightly. The Quadro M500M runs its 2 GB DDR3 memory at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while the GeForce 840M runs the same capacity and type at 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective). This results in the GeForce's higher memory bandwidth of 16.02 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s for the Quadro. Power consumption also differs, with the Quadro rated at 30 W TDP and the GeForce at 33 W TDP. API support is identical — DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The generations reflect different release timelines. The Quadro M500M belongs to the Quadro Maxwell-M (Mx000M) generation and was released on 2016-04-26, succeeding Quadro Kepler-M and preceding Quadro Pascal-M. The GeForce 840M is part of the GeForce 800M generation, released earlier on 2014-03-11, with the GeForce 700M as its predecessor and GeForce 900M as its successor. Both are end-of-life products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clean sweep for the Quadro M500M, though the margins are modest. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Quadro scores 5986 against 5764 for the GeForce 840M, a 3.9% delta. In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the gap widens to 7%, with the Quadro hitting 5222 and the GeForce reaching 4880. The Quadro wins both head-to-head tests, giving it a 2-0 record in direct comparisons.

These results place the Quadro M500M in a slightly higher performance tier. Its average benchmark score of 5604 exceeds the GeForce 840M's 5322 by about 5.3%. The Quadro's percentile rank of 32 versus 31 for the GeForce indicates it outperforms a marginally larger share of the GPU population. However, the GeForce 840M is not far behind in raw computational terms — the identical core configuration and clock speeds mean the performance gap comes down to memory efficiency and driver optimization rather than architectural superiority.

The nearest rival data provides context for each GPU's standing. The Quadro M500M's closest competitor is the AMD FirePro M4000, which scores 5537 and trails by 1.2%. It also edges out the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 by 1.7% and the GeForce GTX 765M by 1.9%, while the AMD Radeon HD 8790M actually beats it by 1.5%. The GeForce 840M, meanwhile, sits in a tighter cluster — it leads the GeForce 930A by just 0.1%, the GeForce GTX 980M by 0.3%, and the GeForce 940M by 0.7%, while the AMD Radeon R7 M445 edges it by 0.7%. This suggests the GeForce 840M is benchmarked against a very closely matched set of rivals, whereas the Quadro M500M faces slightly more spread in competitor performance.

The Vulkan delta of 7% is the largest single-test margin between the two. This could indicate better driver optimization for the Quadro line in compute-heavy Vulkan workloads, or it could reflect the memory clock difference — the GeForce 840M's faster memory does not translate into a Vulkan win. The OpenCL margin of 3.9% is more consistent with the overall average score difference.

The Verdict

The data points to the NVIDIA Quadro M500M for users who prioritize compute performance and professional-grade packaging. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, holds a higher average score (5604 versus 5322), and achieves a better percentile rank. Its 3.9% OpenCL lead and 7% Vulkan lead, while not dramatic, are consistent across both tests. The MXM Module form factor also suggests it is designed for systems where the GPU can be serviced or upgraded, a feature absent from the GeForce 840M's IGP design.

The NVIDIA GeForce 840M is the choice for those who value memory throughput. Its 16.02 GB/s bandwidth exceeds the Quadro's 14.40 GB/s, and it does so with only a 3 W higher TDP (33 W versus 30 W). The lower average benchmark score of 5322 and the 0-2 head-to-head record, however, mean it is the weaker performer in synthetic tests. Its PCIe 3.0 x8 interface and IGP slot width are typical for consumer laptops, making it a more integrated solution.

For professional workloads where OpenCL or Vulkan compute matters, the Quadro M500M is the clear pick from the data. For general consumer use in a laptop where the GPU is fixed and memory bandwidth is a priority, the GeForce 840M holds a narrow advantage. The Quadro's 1.2% margin over the AMD FirePro M4000 and 1.9% over the GeForce GTX 765M show it sits comfortably in its class. The GeForce 840M's 0.1% margin over the GeForce 930A and 0.7% over the GeForce 940M indicate it is essentially tied with its immediate competitors. Neither GPU is a performance leader in absolute terms — the Quadro's 32nd percentile and the GeForce's 31st percentile place both firmly in the lower half of all GPUs. The decision ultimately hinges on whether the Quadro's benchmark wins and MXM flexibility outweigh the GeForce's memory bandwidth advantage.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro M500M | NVIDIA GeForce 840M |

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

| Generation | Quadro Maxwell-M (Mx000M) | GeForce 800M |

| Release Date | 2016-04-26 | 2014-03-11 |

| Memory Clock | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) | 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 14.40 GB/s | 16.02 GB/s |

| TDP | 30 W | 33 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

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

| Predecessor | Quadro Kepler-M | GeForce 700M |

| Successor | Quadro Pascal-M | GeForce 900M |

| Average Benchmark Score | 5604 | 5322 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 32 | 31 |

All other specifications — including process node, die size, transistor count, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, base and boost clocks, memory size, memory type, bus width, pixel rate, texture rate, FP32 performance, and API support — are identical between the two parts.