GeForce GT 640 vs GTX 260M SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 260M SLI with GeForce GT 640, including specs and performance data.
260M SLI outperforms GT 640 by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 801 | 833 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.20 |
| Power efficiency | 1.55 | 3.28 |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | NB9E-GTX | GK107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 2 March 2009 (16 years ago) | 5 June 2012 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 224 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 902 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 28.86 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.6927 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 16 |
| TMUs | no data | 32 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 256 KB |
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 | large | no data |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 145 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | GDDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 950 MHz | 891 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 28.51 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
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 Connectors | no data | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | + | 3.0 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Fortnite | 16−18
+21.4%
|
14−16
−21.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+25%
|
12−14
−25%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+17.5%
|
40−45
−17.5%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 55−60
+14%
|
50−55
−14%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Fortnite | 16−18
+21.4%
|
14−16
−21.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+25%
|
12−14
−25%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+17.5%
|
40−45
−17.5%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+25%
|
12−14
−25%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+17.5%
|
40−45
−17.5%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 16−18
+21.4%
|
14−16
−21.4%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
+23.8%
|
21−24
−23.8%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+14.3%
|
14−16
−14.3%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+25%
|
12−14
−25%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.88 | 2.64 |
| Recency | 2 March 2009 | 5 June 2012 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 65 Watt |
GTX 260M SLI has a 9.1% higher aggregate performance score.
GT 640, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 130.8% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 260M SLI and GeForce GT 640.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 260M SLI is a notebook graphics card while GeForce GT 640 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
