ATI Radeon E4690 vs GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition with Radeon E4690, including specs and performance data.

GT 640M Mac Edition
2013
512 MB GDDR5, 32 Watt
1.04

ATI E4690 outperforms GT 640M Mac Edition by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10921090
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.252.42
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGK107RV730
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date3 February 2013 (11 years ago)1 June 2009 (15 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 cores384320
Core clock speed745 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million514 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)32 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate23.8419.20
Floating-point processing power0.5722 TFLOPSno data
ROPs88
TMUs3232

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 x16MXM-II
Widthno dataMXM Module

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB512 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1400 MHz
Memory bandwidth40 GB/s22.4 GB/s

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 outputsno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)10.1
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.21.0
Vulkan1.1.126-
CUDA3.0-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.04 1.05
Recency 3 February 2013 1 June 2009
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 32 Watt 30 Watt

GT 640M Mac Edition has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.

ATI E4690, on the other hand, has a 1% higher aggregate performance score, and 6.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition and Radeon E4690.

Be aware that GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition is a notebook card while Radeon E4690 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 Mac Edition
GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition
ATI Radeon E4690
Radeon E4690

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.


3.1 9 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Radeon E4690 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.