Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile vs GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GT 640M GT 640M Mac Edition GT 645M GT 650M GT 650M Mac Edition GT 730M GT 745M GT 750M GT 750M Mac Edition GT 755M GTX 660M GTX 660M Mac Edition
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
3000 Mobile 3000 Max-Q 3000 Mobile Refresh 3000 X2 Mobile 4000 Mobile 4000 Max-Q 5000 Mobile 5000 Max-Q 5000 Mobile Refresh 5000 X2 Mobile 6000 Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition with Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GT 640M Mac Edition
2013
512 MB GDDR5, 32 Watt
0.94

RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms 640M Mac Edition by a whopping 2443% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GT 640M Mac Edition GT 640M Mac Edition
RTX 3000 Mobile RTX 3000 Mobile

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1163261
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.2723.14
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGK107TU106
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date3 February 2013 (12 years ago)27 May 2019 (6 years ago)

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 cores3842304
Core clock speed745 MHz945 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1380 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)32 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate23.84198.7
Floating-point processing power0.5722 TFLOPS6.359 TFLOPS
ROPs864
TMUs32144
Tensor Coresno data288
Ray Tracing Coresno data36
L1 Cache32 KB2.3 MB
L2 Cache128 KB4 MB

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB6 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth40 GB/s448.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

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

VR Readyno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA3.07.5
DLSS-+

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 HD3−4
−3067%
95
+3067%
4K3−4
−2833%
88
+2833%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 132
+0%
132
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 109
+0%
109
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 121
+0%
121
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 56
+0%
56
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 88
+0%
88
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

This is how GT 640M Mac Edition and RTX 3000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 3067% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 2833% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.94 23.90
Recency 3 February 2013 27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 32 Watt 80 Watt

GT 640M Mac Edition has 150% lower power consumption.

RTX 3000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 2442.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition is a notebook graphics card while Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

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 Mac Edition
GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile
Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

GT 640M Mac Edition GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition
vs
R2 (Stoney Ridge) Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge)
RTX 3000 Mobile Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile
vs
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
GT 640M Mac Edition GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition
vs
R4 (Beema) Radeon R4 (Beema)
GTX 660M Mac Edition GTX 660M Mac Edition
vs
R9 270 1024SP R9 270 1024SP
GTX 660M Mac Edition GTX 660M Mac Edition
vs
P106-090 P106 090
GTX 660M Mac Edition 660M Mac Edition
vs
RTX 3050 6GB Mobile 3050 6GB Mobile
GT 640M Mac Edition GT 640M Mac Edition
vs
M3000 SE M3000 SE
GT 640M Mac Edition GT 640M Mac Edition
vs
RX 580X RX 580X
GT 640M Mac Edition GT 640M Mac Edition
vs
PRO W7700 PRO W7700
GT 710M GT 710M
vs
HD Graphics 500 HD Graphics 500
GT 710M GT 710M
vs
GMA 500 GMA 500
GTX 680MX Mac Edition GTX 680MX Mac Edition
vs
GTS 240 OEM GTS 240 OEM
RSX Reality Synthesizer RSX Reality Synthesizer
vs
GTX 460 v2 ES GTX 460 v2 ES

Community ratings

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

3.5 11 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 413 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition or Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.