Tegra 3 vs GeForce GT 640

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking767not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.20no data
Power efficiency3.27no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)VLIW Vec4 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameGK107Tegra 3
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 June 2012 (12 years ago)9 November 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99 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 cores384no data
Core clock speed902 MHz416 MHz
Boost clock speedno data520 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million10 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate28.864.160
Floating-point processing power0.6927 TFLOPSno data
ROPs168
TMUs328

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 3.0 x16IGP
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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed891 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/sno data
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+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)N/A
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6ES 2.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA3.0-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 5 June 2012 9 November 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 20 Watt

GT 640 has an age advantage of 6 months, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

Tegra 3, on the other hand, has 225% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 640 and Tegra 3. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GT 640 is a desktop card while Tegra 3 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 Tegra 3
Tegra 3

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 1544 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 5 votes

Rate Tegra 3 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.