HD Graphics 2500 vs GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2

GT 610 GT 610 PCI GT 620 GT 625 OEM GT 630 GT 630 OEM GT 635 OEM GT 640 GT 640 OEM GT 640 OEM Rebrand GT 640 Rev. 2 GT 645 OEM
VS
HD Graphics 2000 HD Graphics 2500 HD Graphics 3000 HD Graphics 4000 HD Graphics 4200 HD Graphics 4400 HD Graphics 4600 HD Graphics 5000 HD Graphics 5300 HD Graphics 5500 HD Graphics 6000

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2 and HD Graphics 2500, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 640 Rev. 2
2013
1 GB GDDR5, 49 Watt
3.55
+414%

GT 640 Rev. 2 outperforms HD Graphics 2500 by a whopping 414% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GT 640 Rev. 2 GT 640 Rev. 2
HD Graphics 2500 HD Graphics 2500

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7171167
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.19no data
Power efficiency5.02no data
ArchitectureKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)Generation 7.0 (2012−2013)
GPU code nameGK208Ivy Bridge GT1
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date29 May 2013 (11 years ago)1 April 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$89 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores38448
Core clock speed1046 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1150 MHz
Number of transistors915 million392 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)49 Wattunknown
Texture fill rate33.476.900
Floating-point processing power0.8033 TFLOPS0.1104 TFLOPS
ROPs81
TMUs326

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x8PCIe 1.0 x16
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1252 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth40.06 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGANo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.0
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.80
CUDA3.5-

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 HD35−40
+400%
7
−400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.54no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how GT 640 Rev. 2 and HD Graphics 2500 compete in popular games:

  • GT 640 Rev. 2 is 400% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 35 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 3.55 0.69
Recency 29 May 2013 1 April 2012
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm

GT 640 Rev. 2 has a 414.5% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

HD Graphics 2500, on the other hand, has a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 2500 in performance tests.

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

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 GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2
GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2
Intel HD Graphics 2500
HD Graphics 2500
Like
Like

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

GT 640 Rev. 2 GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2
vs
ATI HD 4870 Radeon HD 4870
HD Graphics 2500 HD Graphics 2500
vs
HD 8400 Radeon HD 8400
GT 640 Rev. 2 GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2
vs
Radeon 540 Radeon 540
Pro W6600 Radeon Pro W6600
vs
RX 6300 Radeon RX 6300
ATI Mobility 9500 Mobility Radeon 9500
vs
RTX 4060 Ti GeForce RTX 4060 Ti
GT 610 PCI GeForce GT 610 PCI
vs
6100 + nForce 400 GeForce 6100 + nForce 400
Apple M1 8-Core GPU M1 8 Core GPU
vs
520 Mobile GDDR5 Radeon 520 Mobile GDDR5
ATI 9800 SE Radeon 9800 SE
vs
FX 5900 XT GeForce FX 5900 XT
STG-2000X STG 2000X
vs
RX 6750 GRE Radeon RX 6750 GRE
Tegra 2 Tegra 2
vs
RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation
RTX 4060 GeForce RTX 4060
vs
NVS 440 PCIe x1 Quadro NVS 440 PCIe x1
9100M G GeForce 9100M G
vs
ATI 3D Rage PRO Turbo 3D Rage PRO Turbo
G84 G84
vs
Apple M2 Max 38-Core GPU M2 Max 38-Core GPU

Community ratings

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

3.9 26 votes

Rate GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 1333 votes

Rate HD Graphics 2500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.