ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4670 vs GeForce GT 640M LE

Place in the ranking	914	1047
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.04	no data
Power efficiency	3.96	2.37
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code name	GF108	M96
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	4 May 2012 (12 years ago)	9 January 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$849.99	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 cores	Up to 384	320
Core clock speed	Up to 500 MHz	675 MHz
Number of transistors	585 million	514 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	35 Watt
Texture fill rate	12.05	21.60
Floating-point processing power	0.289 TFLOPS	0.432 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	8
TMUs	16	32

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 size	medium sized	medium sized
Bus support	PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	MXM-A (3.0)

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\DDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	128bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	785 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	Up to 28.8 GB/s	25.6 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 Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
HDMI	+	-
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	Up to 2048x1536	no 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.

DirectX	12 API	10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	5.1	4.1
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/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 1.83
+52.5%

ATI Mobility HD 4670 1.20

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 640M LE 5788
+92.6%

ATI Mobility HD 4670 3005

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:

900p	19 +58.3%	12−14 −58.3%
Full HD	19 +58.3%	12−14 −58.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

44.74

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5
+33.3%

3−4

−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +21.4%	14−16 −21.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +9.4%	30−35 −9.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +21.4%	14−16 −21.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +9.1%	10−12 −9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +9.4%	30−35 −9.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +21.4%	14−16 −21.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +9.1%	10−12 −9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +9.4%	30−35 −9.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+100%

2−3

−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
+25%

4−5

−25%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

This is how GT 640M LE and ATI Mobility HD 4670 compete in popular games:

GT 640M LE is 58% faster in 900p
GT 640M LE is 58% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 640M LE is 250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GT 640M LE is ahead in 39 tests (83%)
there's a draw in 8 tests (17%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.83	1.20
Recency	4 May 2012	9 January 2009
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	40 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	35 Watt

GT 640M LE has a 52.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 37.5% more advanced lithography process, and 75% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 640M LE is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 4670 in performance tests.

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