Radeon RX 640 vs GRID K340

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GRID K340 with Radeon RX 640, including specs and performance data.

GRID K340
2013, $3,299
1 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
2.87

RX 640 outperforms K340 by an impressive 80% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking815665
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency0.987.97
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGK107Polaris 23
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date23 July 2013 (12 years ago)13 May 2019 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,299 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores384 ×4640
Core clock speed950 MHz1082 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1218 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate30.40 ×448.72
Floating-point processing power0.7296 TFLOPS ×41.559 TFLOPS
ROPs8 ×416
TMUs32 ×440
L1 Cache32 KB160 KB
L2 Cache128 KB512 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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB ×42 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit ×464 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/s ×448 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA3.0-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD14−16
−92.9%
27
+92.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p235.64no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 53
+0%
53
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+0%
20
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 49
+0%
49
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+0%
11
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how GRID K340 and RX 640 compete in popular games:

  • RX 640 is 93% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.87 5.17
Recency 23 July 2013 13 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 50 Watt

RX 640 has a 80.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 350% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 640 is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID K340 in performance tests.

Be aware that GRID K340 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 640 is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GRID K340
GRID K340
AMD Radeon RX 640
Radeon RX 640

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


1 1 vote

Rate GRID K340 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 278 votes

Rate Radeon RX 640 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GRID K340 or Radeon RX 640, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.