NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M vs AMD FirePro V3900

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M and AMD FirePro V3900 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).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 month(s) later
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 6.2x lower typical power consumption: 32 Watt vs 199 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
• Around 44% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 923 vs 640
• 2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3184 vs 1564
• Around 69% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 7.861 vs 4.646
• Around 55% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.727 vs 0.468
• Around 12% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 15.445 vs 13.784
• Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1476 vs 1311
• Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1963 vs 1631
• Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1476 vs 1311
• Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1963 vs 1631

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro V3900

• Around 25% higher pipelines: 480 vs 384
• Around 30% better floating-point performance: 624.0 gflops vs 480.0 gflops
• Around 20% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 237 vs 198
• Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 279.435 vs 275.972
• 3.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 58.58 vs 17.381
• Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 2580
• Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 2580

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M
GPU 2: AMD FirePro V3900

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	923 640
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	198 237
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	3184 1564
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7.861 4.646
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	275.972 279.435
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.727 0.468
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.445 13.784
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	17.381 58.58
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1476 1311
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1963 1631
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2580 3358
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1476 1311
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1963 1631
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2580 3358

Compare specifications (specs)