GeForce GT 640 OEM vs GTX 680

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 680 and GeForce GT 640 OEM, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 680
2012
2048 MB GDDR5, 195 Watt
14.50
+758%

GTX 680 outperforms GT 640 OEM by a whopping 758% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking367943
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.07no data
Power efficiency5.102.32
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK104GK107
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date22 March 2012 (12 years ago)24 April 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores1536384
Core clock speed1006 MHz797 MHz
Boost clock speed1058 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)195 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate135.425.50
Floating-point processing power3.25 TFLOPS0.6121 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs12832

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length254 mm145 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2048 MB2 GB
Memory bus width256-bit GDDR5128 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz891 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.2 GB/s28.51 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI++
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.24.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
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.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p45
+800%
5−6
−800%
Full HD75
+838%
8−9
−838%
4K25
+1150%
2−3
−1150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.65no data
4K19.96no data

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Atomic Heart 35−40
+775%
4−5
−775%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Atomic Heart 35−40
+775%
4−5
−775%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+883%
6−7
−883%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+820%
5−6
−820%
Fortnite 75−80
+767%
9−10
−767%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+850%
6−7
−850%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+825%
4−5
−825%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+880%
5−6
−880%
Valorant 110−120
+858%
12−14
−858%
Atomic Heart 35−40
+775%
4−5
−775%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+883%
6−7
−883%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 224
+833%
24−27
−833%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Dota 2 85−90
+780%
10−11
−780%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+820%
5−6
−820%
Fortnite 75−80
+767%
9−10
−767%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+850%
6−7
−850%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+825%
4−5
−825%
Grand Theft Auto V 56
+833%
6−7
−833%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+880%
5−6
−880%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 42
+950%
4−5
−950%
Valorant 110−120
+858%
12−14
−858%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+883%
6−7
−883%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Dota 2 85−90
+780%
10−11
−780%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+820%
5−6
−820%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+850%
6−7
−850%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+825%
4−5
−825%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+880%
5−6
−880%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+1000%
2−3
−1000%
Valorant 110−120
+858%
12−14
−858%
Fortnite 75−80
+767%
9−10
−767%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+920%
10−11
−920%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+950%
2−3
−950%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+793%
14−16
−793%
Valorant 140−150
+794%
16−18
−794%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+850%
4−5
−850%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+1100%
2−3
−1100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+950%
2−3
−950%
Fortnite 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Atomic Heart 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 21
+950%
2−3
−950%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Valorant 70−75
+825%
8−9
−825%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 0−1
Dota 2 45−50
+880%
5−6
−880%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+1100%
2−3
−1100%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Fortnite 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%

This is how GTX 680 and GT 640 OEM compete in popular games:

  • GTX 680 is 800% faster in 900p
  • GTX 680 is 838% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 680 is 1150% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.50 1.69
Recency 22 March 2012 24 April 2012
Power consumption (TDP) 195 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 680 has a 758% higher aggregate performance score.

GT 640 OEM, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 month, and 290% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 680 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640 OEM in performance tests.

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 GTX 680
GeForce GTX 680
NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 OEM
GeForce GT 640 OEM

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.


3.8
599 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 680 or GeForce GT 640 OEM, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.