GeForce 830M vs GT 640

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

GT 640
2012
2 GB DDR3, 65 Watt
3.04
+16.5%

GT 640 outperforms 830M by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking730783
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.200.56
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameGK107N15?
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 June 2012 (12 years ago)12 March 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99 no data
Current price$157 (1.6x MSRP)$160

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GeForce 830M has 180% better value for money than GT 640.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores384256
Core clock speed902 MHz1029 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1150 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt33 Watt
Texture fill rate28.8618.40
Floating-point performance692.7 gflops588.8 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GT 640 and GeForce 830M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1782 MHz1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/s14.4 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+no data

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boostno data2.0
Optimusno data+
GameWorksno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
CUDA3.0+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

GT 640 3.04
+16.5%
GeForce 830M 2.61

GT 640 outperforms 830M by 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GT 640 1175
+16.6%
GeForce 830M 1008

GT 640 outperforms 830M by 17% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GT 640 1560
+12.5%
GeForce 830M 1387

GT 640 outperforms 830M by 13% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GT 640 3756
GeForce 830M 4371
+16.4%

830M outperforms GT 640 by 16% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

GT 640 3841
GeForce 830M 4078
+6.2%

830M outperforms GT 640 by 6% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GT 640 2853
GeForce 830M 4342
+52.2%

830M outperforms GT 640 by 52% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

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 HD18−20
+12.5%
16
−12.5%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.04 2.61
Recency 5 June 2012 12 March 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 33 Watt

The GeForce GT 640 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 830M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 640 is a desktop card while GeForce 830M is a notebook one.


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
GeForce GT 640
NVIDIA GeForce 830M
GeForce 830M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.4 1441 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 101 vote

Rate GeForce 830M 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.