ATI Radeon HD 4850 X2 vs GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2 and Radeon HD 4850 X2, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
640 Rev. 2 outperforms HD 4850 X2 by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 801 | 863 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.19 | 0.13 |
| Power efficiency | 5.21 | 0.84 |
| Architecture | Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015) | TeraScale (2005−2013) |
| GPU code name | GK208 | R700 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 29 May 2013 (13 years ago) | 7 November 2008 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $89 | $420 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
GT 640 Rev. 2 has 46% better value for money than ATI HD 4850 X2.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 384 | 800 ×2 |
| Core clock speed | 1046 MHz | 625 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 915 million | 956 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 49 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 33.47 | 25.00 ×2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.8033 TFLOPS | 1 TFLOPS ×2 |
| ROPs | 8 | 16 ×2 |
| TMUs | 32 | 40 ×2 |
| L1 Cache | 32 KB | 160 KB |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 256 KB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 145 mm | 267 mm |
| Width | 1-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB ×2 |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 256 Bit ×2 |
| Memory clock speed | 1252 MHz | 995 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 40.06 GB/s | 63.68 GB/s ×2 |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | 4x DVI, 1x S-Video |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 10.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | N/A |
| CUDA | 3.5 | - |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.30 | 2.72 |
| Recency | 29 May 2013 | 7 November 2008 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 49 Watt | 250 Watt |
GT 640 Rev. 2 has a 21% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 96% more advanced lithography process, and 410% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4850 X2 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
