NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M vs NVIDIA GeForce 510 OEM
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M and NVIDIA GeForce 510 OEM 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 5 month(s) later
- 8x more pipelines: 384 vs 48
- 4.8x better floating-point performance: 480.0 gflops vs 100.42 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
- 3.6x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 925 vs 255
- Around 18% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 199 vs 169
- 4.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3184 vs 758
- Around 57% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1963 vs 1254
- Around 50% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2580 vs 1723
- Around 57% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1963 vs 1254
- Around 50% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2580 vs 1723
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 22 March 2012 vs 29 September 2011 |
Pipelines | 384 vs 48 |
Floating-point performance | 480.0 gflops vs 100.42 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1 GB |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz vs 1796 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 925 vs 255 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 199 vs 169 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3184 vs 758 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1963 vs 1254 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2580 vs 1723 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1963 vs 1254 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2580 vs 1723 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 510 OEM
- Around 28% lower typical power consumption: 25 Watt vs 32 Watt
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 25 Watt vs 32 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 510 OEM
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M | NVIDIA GeForce 510 OEM |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 925 | 255 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 199 | 169 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3184 | 758 |
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 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1476 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1963 | 1254 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2580 | 1723 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1476 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1963 | 1254 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2580 | 1723 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M | NVIDIA GeForce 510 OEM | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Kepler | Fermi 2.0 |
Code name | GK107 | GF119 |
Launch date | 22 March 2012 | 29 September 2011 |
Place in performance rating | 1346 | 1348 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 645 MHz | |
CUDA cores | 384 | |
Floating-point performance | 480.0 gflops | 100.42 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 48 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 32 Watt | 25 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,270 million | 292 million |
Core clock speed | 523 MHz | |
Texture fill rate | 4.18 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
Length | 145 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 API | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
Memory bus width | 128bit | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1796 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3\GDDR5 | DDR3 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Memory bandwidth | 14.37 GB / s | |
Technologies |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
3D Vision | ||
CUDA | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Optimus |