GeForce RTX 5060 vs GT 640 OEM
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 640 OEM and GeForce RTX 5060, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX 5060 outperforms GT 640 OEM by a whopping 3388% 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 | 977 | 52 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 100.00 |
| Power efficiency | 2.32 | 27.89 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | GK107 | GB206 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 24 April 2012 (13 years ago) | 19 May 2025 (recently) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $299 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 cores | 384 | 3840 |
| Core clock speed | 797 MHz | 2280 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2497 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,270 million | 21,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 145 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 25.50 | 299.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.6121 TFLOPS | 19.18 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 48 |
| TMUs | 32 | 120 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 120 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 30 |
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 3.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x8 |
| Length | 145 mm | 241 mm |
| Width | 1-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | DDR3 | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 891 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.51 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | no data | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |
| HDMI | + | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.4 |
| CUDA | 3.0 | 12.0 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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 | 4−5
−3750%
| 154
+3750%
|
| 1440p | 2−3
−3800%
| 78
+3800%
|
| 4K | 1−2
−5100%
| 52
+5100%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 1.94 |
| 1440p | no data | 3.83 |
| 4K | no data | 5.75 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 280−290
+0%
|
280−290
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Dead Island 2 | 250−260
+0%
|
250−260
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 280−290
+0%
|
280−290
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Dead Island 2 | 250−260
+0%
|
250−260
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 250
+0%
|
250
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 240−250
+0%
|
240−250
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Valorant | 290−300
+0%
|
290−300
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 280−290
+0%
|
280−290
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+0%
|
270−280
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Dead Island 2 | 250−260
+0%
|
250−260
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 228
+0%
|
228
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 240−250
+0%
|
240−250
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 286
+0%
|
286
+0%
|
| Valorant | 290−300
+0%
|
290−300
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Dead Island 2 | 250−260
+0%
|
250−260
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 213
+0%
|
213
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 143
+0%
|
143
+0%
|
| Valorant | 290−300
+0%
|
290−300
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 240−250
+0%
|
240−250
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 350−400
+0%
|
350−400
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Valorant | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Dead Island 2 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 145
+0%
|
145
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 106
+0%
|
106
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 91
+0%
|
91
+0%
|
| Valorant | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Dead Island 2 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 75
+0%
|
75
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
This is how GT 640 OEM and RTX 5060 compete in popular games:
- RTX 5060 is 3750% faster in 1080p
- RTX 5060 is 3800% faster in 1440p
- RTX 5060 is 5100% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.63 | 56.86 |
| Recency | 24 April 2012 | 19 May 2025 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 145 Watt |
GT 640 OEM has 190% lower power consumption.
RTX 5060, on the other hand, has a 3388.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 5060 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640 OEM 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.
