Radeon RX 640 vs GeForce 820M

Place in the ranking	1036	616
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	5.84	7.25
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	GF117	Polaris 23
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	27 November 2013 (11 years ago)	13 May 2019 (5 years ago)

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 cores	96	640
Core clock speed	625 MHz	1082 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1218 MHz
Number of transistors	585 million	2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	10.00	48.72
Floating-point processing power	0.24 TFLOPS	1.559 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	16
TMUs	16	40

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 size	no data	large
Bus support	PCI Express 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	DDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14.4 GB/s	48 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

No outputs

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync	-	+
GPU Boost	2.0	no data
Optimus	+	-
GameWorks	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	+	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 820M 1.28

RX 640 5.29
+313%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GeForce 820M 494

RX 640 2040
+313%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GeForce 820M 1267

RX 640 5235
+313%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GeForce 820M 5106

RX 640 14141
+177%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GeForce 820M 897

RX 640 3499
+290%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce 820M 6074

RX 640 19946
+228%

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 HD

−80%

27
+80%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

−125%

9−10
+125%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −233%	20 +233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −175%	10−12 +175%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −367%	14−16 +367%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −1500%	30−35 +1500%
Hitman 3	6−7 −83.3%	10−12 +83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −136%	30−35 +136%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −1200%	26 +1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −42.4%	45−50 +42.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −175%	10−12 +175%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −367%	14−16 +367%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −1500%	30−35 +1500%
Hitman 3	6−7 −83.3%	10−12 +83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −136%	30−35 +136%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −600%	14−16 +600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −63.6%	18−20 +63.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −42.4%	45−50 +42.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −175%	10−12 +175%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −1500%	30−35 +1500%
Hitman 3	6−7 −83.3%	10−12 +83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −136%	30−35 +136%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +0%	11 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −42.4%	45−50 +42.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−600%

14−16
+600%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −400%	5−6 +400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	4−5
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Hitman 3	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −175%	10−12 +175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	4−5
Watch Dogs: Legion	6−7 −433%	30−35 +433%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−125%

9−10
+125%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

0−1

3−4

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	2−3
Far Cry 5	0−1	3−4

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−100%

6−7
+100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	27 +0%	27 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	10 +0%	10 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

5−6

+0%

5−6

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hitman 3	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

This is how GeForce 820M and RX 640 compete in popular games:

RX 640 is 80% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 640 is 1500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 640 is ahead in 46 tests (73%)
there's a draw in 17 tests (27%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.28	5.29
Recency	27 November 2013	13 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	50 Watt

GeForce 820M has 233.3% lower power consumption.

RX 640, on the other hand, has a 313.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 640 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 820M in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.