GeForce 7950 GT vs GT 640M LE

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 640M LE with GeForce 7950 GT, including specs and performance data.

GT 640M LE
2012
2 GB DDR3\DDR5, 20 Watt
1.84
+104%

GT 640M LE outperforms 7950 GT by a whopping 104% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9241128
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.060.05
Power efficiency3.970.95
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameGF108G71
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date4 May 2012 (12 years ago)6 August 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$849.99 $114.95

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 640M LE has 20% better value for money than 7950 GT.

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 coresUp to 384no data
Core clock speedUp to 500 MHz550 MHz
Number of transistors585 million278 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate12.0513.20
Floating-point processing power0.289 TFLOPSno data
ROPs416
TMUs1624

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-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 typeDDR3\DDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed785 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 28.8 GB/s44.8 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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolutionUp to 2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray+-
Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.52.1
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
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.

GT 640M LE 1.84
+104%
7950 GT 0.90

  • Passmark

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.

GT 640M LE 707
+104%
7950 GT 347

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:

900p19
+111%
9−10
−111%
Full HD19
+111%
9−10
−111%

Cost per frame, $

1080p44.74
−250%
12.77
+250%
  • 7950 GT has 250% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Dota 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Fortnite 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
World of Tanks 35−40
+125%
16−18
−125%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Dota 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
World of Tanks 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Valorant 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Dota 2 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Valorant 2−3 0−1

This is how GT 640M LE and 7950 GT compete in popular games:

  • GT 640M LE is 111% faster in 900p
  • GT 640M LE is 111% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.84 0.90
Recency 4 May 2012 6 August 2006
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 65 Watt

GT 640M LE has a 104.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 125% more advanced lithography process, and 225% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 640M LE is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 7950 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 640M LE is a notebook card while GeForce 7950 GT is a desktop 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 640M LE
GeForce GT 640M LE
NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GT
GeForce 7950 GT

Other comparisons

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.


3.3
60 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9
30 votes

Rate GeForce 7950 GT 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.