Skip to content
RU

GeForce 840M vs GeForce GTX 965M: specs and benchmark comparison

ANVIDIA · Maxwell

NVIDIA GeForce 840M

  • 30 W

March 12, 2014

BNVIDIA · Maxwell

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M

  • 60 W

January 5, 2015

Short verdict

Not enough data for a performance conclusion: the database has no comparable benchmarks for this pair. Below are the key differences in official specifications.

Compare with AI

Advantages

Only measured and rated values: a noticeable benchmark gap and specs where more is better.

Where GeForce 840M is better1

  • Board power 30 W lower30 W (TDP) vs 60 W (TDP)

Where GeForce GTX 965M is better2

  • Memory bus 64 bit more128 bit vs 64 bit

  • Memory bandwidth 64 GB/s more80 GB/s vs 16 GB/s

Benchmarks

Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions. Laptop chip results depend on the laptop model: its maker sets the power limit and cooling.

  • Blender Benchmark 2.90

    GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better

    No advantage conclusion: small sample in one of the results.

    About the measurement and source
    A · NVIDIA GeForce 840M

    893.7 s · community measurement, sample 2 · November 14, 2026

    Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)

    Median of 2 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 893.16–894.21; submissions 2020-11-05 to 2020-11-06; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.

    B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M

    305.9 s · community measurement, sample 3 · November 14, 2026

    Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)

    Median of 3 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 301.59–318.02; submissions 2020-10-29 to 2021-01-18; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.

    difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.

    Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.

Reference results (20)
BenchmarkABDifference
Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA)868.6—no pair
Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA)889.4—no pair
Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA)860.4—no pair
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA)716.1—no pair
Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX)991.3—no pair
Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA)2,871.8—no pair
Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA)2,953984.5reference
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (CUDA)2,554.6—no pair
Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA)1,790.4613.7reference
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA)1,979.7—no pair
Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (CUDA)3,088.41,128.1reference
Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA)4,657.71,647.1reference
Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (CUDA)98,9924,013.7reference
Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA)24.7—no pair
Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA)66.9—no pair
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal)45.1—no pair
Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal)47.7—no pair
Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal)42.8162.7reference
Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal)—91.8no pair
Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal)—132.6no pair

Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.

Specifications

Chip maker values. The laptop maker sets the power limit and clocks in each laptop.

Chip

  • GPU chip

    AGM108

    BGM204

    differs

  • Architecture

    AMaxwell

    BMaxwell

    equal

Clocks

  • Base clock

    A1,029 MHz

    Bno data

    no data for B

Memory

  • Memory type

    ADDR3

    BGDDR5

    differs

  • Memory bus

    A64 bit

    B128 bit

    B: 64 bit more

  • Memory bandwidth

    A16 GB/s

    B80 GB/s

    B: 64 GB/s more

    Excludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.

Power and dimensions

  • Board power

    A30 W (TDP)

    B60 W (TDP)

    B: 30 W higher

    TGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops.

  • Interface

    APCIe 3.0 x16

    BPCIe 3.0 x16

    equal

“More” does not always mean “better”: higher power draw or size is a system requirement, not an advantage (such bars are dimmed).

Compare with AI

An AI model reviews the specs and benchmarks of this pair and gives a plain-language verdict on who each model suits.

AI verdict

Questions and answers

Which PCIe interface do the cards use?

NVIDIA GeForce 840M: PCIe 3.0 x16. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M: PCIe 3.0 x16.

Data sources (2)
  • Wikipedia (English) — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce 840M, specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 2026
  • Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation) — benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.82, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.83, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.92, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.93.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.0.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0checked November 14, 2026

How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.

TelegramVK