HD Graphics 400 vs GeForce GT 640M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 640M and HD Graphics 400, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 640M
2012
2 GB DDR3\GDDR5, 32 Watt
2.30
+113%

GT 640M outperforms HD Graphics 400 by a whopping 113% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8481084
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.1913.02
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code nameGK107Braswell GT1
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date22 March 2012 (12 years ago)1 April 2015 (9 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 cores38496
Core clock speedUp to 625 MHz320 MHz
Boost clock speed645 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)32 Watt6 Watt
Texture fill rate20.007.200
Floating-point processing power0.48 TFLOPS0.1152 TFLOPS
ROPs162
TMUs3212

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 3.0 x16Ring Bus

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\GDDR5DDR3L
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128bitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidthUp to 64.0 GB/sno data
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 outputsPortable Device Dependent
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 API12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.3
OpenCL1.13.0
Vulkan1.1.126+
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 2.30
+113%
HD Graphics 400 1.08

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GT 640M 1225
+172%
HD Graphics 400 450

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:

900p26
+117%
12−14
−117%
Full HD22
+120%
10−12
−120%
1200p19
+138%
8−9
−138%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2 0−1
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Valorant 1−2 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Dota 2 13
+117%
6−7
−117%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Fortnite 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 8
+167%
3−4
−167%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Valorant 1−2 0−1
World of Tanks 49
+133%
21−24
−133%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Dota 2 24
+140%
10−11
−140%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
Valorant 1−2 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
World of Tanks 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Valorant 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Dota 2 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Fortnite 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
Valorant 2−3 0−1

This is how GT 640M and HD Graphics 400 compete in popular games:

  • GT 640M is 117% faster in 900p
  • GT 640M is 120% faster in 1080p
  • GT 640M is 138% faster in 1200p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.30 1.08
Recency 22 March 2012 1 April 2015
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 32 Watt 6 Watt

GT 640M has a 113% higher aggregate performance score.

HD Graphics 400, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 433.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 640M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 400 in performance tests.


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
GeForce GT 640M
Intel HD Graphics 400
HD Graphics 400

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.


3.7 318 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 419 votes

Rate HD Graphics 400 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.