NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 vs NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 and NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G 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, 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), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 4 month(s) later
- Around 13% higher core clock speed: 902 MHz vs 800 MHz
- 9x more texture fill rate: 28.86 GTexel / s vs 3.2 GTexel / s
- 24x more pipelines: 384 vs 16
- 27.1x better floating-point performance: 692.7 gflops vs 25.6 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 80 nm
- 8x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 256 MB
- 3x more memory clock speed: 1782 MHz vs 600 MHz
- 13.8x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1173 vs 85
- Around 22% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 295 vs 242
- 4.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3328 vs 778
- 4.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3328 vs 778
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 5 June 2012 vs 1 February 2008 |
| Core clock speed | 902 MHz vs 800 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 28.86 GTexel / s vs 3.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 384 vs 16 |
| Floating-point performance | 692.7 gflops vs 25.6 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 80 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 256 MB |
| Memory clock speed | 1782 MHz vs 600 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1173 vs 85 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 295 vs 242 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3328 vs 778 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3328 vs 778 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G
- 5x lower typical power consumption: 13 Watt vs 65 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 13 Watt vs 65 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 640
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 | NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1173 | 85 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 295 | 242 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3766 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 11.448 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 206.777 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.792 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 14.637 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 20.86 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2134 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2375 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3328 | 778 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2134 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2375 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3328 | 778 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1565 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 | NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | Tesla |
| Code name | GK107 | G86 |
| Launch date | 5 June 2012 | 1 February 2008 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $99 | |
| Place in performance rating | 1178 | 1181 |
| Price now | $59.99 | |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 25.25 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 902 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 692.7 gflops | 25.6 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 80 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 16 |
| Texture fill rate | 28.86 GTexel / s | 3.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 13 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,270 million | 210 million |
| CUDA cores | 16 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 145 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 256 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.51 GB / s | 9.6 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1782 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR2 / GDDR3 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| Gigathread technology | ||
| HDCP-capable | ||
| HDR (High Dynamic-Range Lighting) | ||
| PCI-E 16x | ||
| PowerMizer 7.0 | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 with others
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9300M G
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 3400
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8670M
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 675MX Mac Edition
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640 vs
AMDRadeon R7 A360
