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: 919 vs 255
- Around 15% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 195 vs 169
- 4.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3191 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 | 919 vs 255 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 195 vs 169 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3191 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 | 919 | 255 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 195 | 169 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3191 | 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 | 1340 | 1342 |
| 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 | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M with others
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 570M
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640M vs
NVIDIAGeForce 510 OEM
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640M vs
AMDFirePro V3900
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640M LE
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640M vs
AMDRadeon HD 7500G
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640M vs
AMDRadeon HD 8350G
