NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M and NVIDIA Quadro 2000M 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 year(s) 2 month(s) later
• 2x more pipelines: 384 vs 192
• Around 14% better floating-point performance: 480.0 gflops vs 422.4 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• Around 72% lower typical power consumption: 32 Watt vs 55 Watt
• Around 22% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 931 vs 766
• Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 275.972 vs 272.707
• Around 7% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 15.445 vs 14.423
• Around 17% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1476 vs 1261
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1963 vs 1926
• Around 17% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1476 vs 1261
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1963 vs 1926

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

• Around 13% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 231 vs 204
• Around 8% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3424 vs 3185
• Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.306 vs 7.861
• Around 18% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.855 vs 0.727
• Around 56% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 27.158 vs 17.381

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	931 766
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	204 231
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	3185 3424
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7.861 8.306
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	275.972 272.707
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.727 0.855
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.445 14.423
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	17.381 27.158
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1476 1261
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1963 1926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2580 2569
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1476 1261
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1963 1926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2580 2569

Compare specifications (specs)