Intel UHD Graphics 610 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M
Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 610 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel UHD Graphics 610
- Videocard is newer: launch date 6 year(s) 0 month(s) later
- Around 63% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 645 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 2.1x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 32 Watt
| Launch date | 3 April 2018 vs 22 March 2012 |
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz vs 645 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 32 Watt |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M
- Around 34% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 931 vs 693
- Around 19% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 204 vs 171
- Around 18% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3186 vs 2697
- Around 38% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1476 vs 1071
- Around 38% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1476 vs 1071
- Around 58% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1963 vs 1241
- Around 58% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1963 vs 1241
- Around 52% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2580 vs 1699
- Around 52% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2580 vs 1699
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 931 vs 693 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 204 vs 171 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3186 vs 2697 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1476 vs 1071 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1476 vs 1071 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1963 vs 1241 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1963 vs 1241 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2580 vs 1699 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2580 vs 1699 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 610
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | Intel UHD Graphics 610 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 693 | 931 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 171 | 204 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 2697 | 3186 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1071 | 1476 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1071 | 1476 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1241 | 1963 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1241 | 1963 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1699 | 2580 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1699 | 2580 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 7.861 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 275.972 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.727 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.445 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 17.381 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel UHD Graphics 610 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.5 | Kepler |
| Code name | Coffee Lake GT1 | GK107 |
| Launch date | 3 April 2018 | 22 March 2012 |
| Place in performance rating | 1350 | 1352 |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | 645 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 32 Watt |
| Transistor count | 189 million | 1,270 million |
| CUDA cores | 384 | |
| Floating-point performance | 480.0 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 384 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Bus support | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 API |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
| Memory bus width | 128bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | |
| Memory type | DDR3\GDDR5 | |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Blu-Ray | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DirectCompute | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
| Optimus | ||

