Radeon HD 7640G vs Quadro FX 2800M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 2800M with Radeon HD 7640G, including specs and performance data.

FX 2800M
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 75 Watt
0.94

HD 7640G outperforms FX 2800M by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11401115
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.012.37
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameG92Devastator Lite
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date1 December 2009 (15 years ago)15 May 2012 (13 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 cores96256
Core clock speed600 MHz496 MHz
Boost clock speedno data685 MHz
Number of transistors754 million1,303 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate28.8010.96
Floating-point processing power0.288 TFLOPS0.3507 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs4816
L2 Cache64 KBno data

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)IGP

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth64 GB/sno data
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

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.0
OpenGL3.34.4
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

FX 2800M 0.94
HD 7640G 1.03
+9.6%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

FX 2800M Samples: 346 414
HD 7640G Samples: 1180 454
+9.7%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

FX 2800M 5783
+123%
HD 7640G 2599

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 HD31
+210%
10
−210%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 1−2
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 30−35
−3.2%
30−35
+3.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
−4%
24−27
+4%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 1−2
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Valorant 30−35
−3.2%
30−35
+3.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Valorant 30−35
−3.2%
30−35
+3.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Valorant 0−1 2−3

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

4K
Ultra Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 0−1 0−1

This is how FX 2800M and HD 7640G compete in popular games:

  • FX 2800M is 210% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD 7640G is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 7640G performs better in 14 tests (34%)
  • there's a draw in 27 tests (66%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.94 1.03
Recency 1 December 2009 15 May 2012
Chip lithography 65 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 35 Watt

HD 7640G has a 9.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 103.1% more advanced lithography process, and 114.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro FX 2800M and Radeon HD 7640G.

Be aware that Quadro FX 2800M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 7640G 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 Quadro FX 2800M
Quadro FX 2800M
AMD Radeon HD 7640G
Radeon HD 7640G

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.


3.1 7 votes

Rate Quadro FX 2800M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 169 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7640G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 2800M or Radeon HD 7640G, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.