GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition vs Quadro K3100M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K3100M with GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition, including specs and performance data.

K3100M
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
5.41
+464%

K3100M outperforms GT 640M Mac Edition by a whopping 464% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6381147
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.11no data
Power efficiency5.502.29
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK104GK107
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date23 July 2013 (12 years ago)3 February 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,999 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

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 cores768384
Core clock speed706 MHz745 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt32 Watt
Texture fill rate45.1823.84
Floating-point processing power1.084 TFLOPS0.5722 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs6432

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth102.4 GB/s40 GB/s
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
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
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.

Average FPS across all PC games

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

Full HD35
+483%
6−7
−483%
4K15
+650%
2−3
−650%

Cost per frame, $

1080p57.11no data
4K133.27no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+550%
4−5
−550%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
God of War 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+475%
4−5
−475%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+550%
4−5
−550%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Fortnite 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+525%
4−5
−525%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
God of War 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Valorant 65−70
+550%
10−11
−550%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+475%
4−5
−475%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+550%
4−5
−550%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+481%
16−18
−481%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Dota 2 45−50
+543%
7−8
−543%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Fortnite 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+525%
4−5
−525%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
God of War 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+600%
2−3
−600%
Valorant 65−70
+550%
10−11
−550%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+475%
4−5
−475%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Dota 2 45−50
+543%
7−8
−543%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+525%
4−5
−525%
God of War 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+600%
1−2
−600%
Valorant 65−70
+550%
10−11
−550%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+500%
7−8
−500%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+517%
6−7
−517%
Valorant 60−65
+510%
10−11
−510%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
God of War 5−6 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5 0−1
Valorant 27−30
+600%
4−5
−600%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
God of War 4−5 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6 0−1

This is how K3100M and GT 640M Mac Edition compete in popular games:

  • K3100M is 483% faster in 1080p
  • K3100M is 650% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.41 0.96
Recency 23 July 2013 3 February 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 32 Watt

K3100M has a 463.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 months, and a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GT 640M Mac Edition, on the other hand, has 134.4% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K3100M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K3100M is a mobile workstation graphics card while GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition 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 K3100M
Quadro K3100M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition
GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition

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.


4 132 votes

Rate Quadro K3100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 11 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K3100M or GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.