GeForce GT 640M vs Quadro K620

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K620 with GeForce GT 640M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K620
2014
2 GB 128-bit, 41 Watt
5.79
+140%

K620 outperforms GT 640M by a whopping 140% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking601846
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.77no data
Power efficiency8.875.19
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGM107GK107
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date22 July 2014 (10 years ago)22 March 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$189.89 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores384384
Core clock speed1058 MHzUp to 625 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHz645 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)41 Watt32 Watt
Texture fill rate26.9820.00
Floating-point processing power0.8632 TFLOPS0.48 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs2432

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length160 mmno data
Width1" (2.5 cm)no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 type128 BitDDR3\GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 29 GB/sUp to 64.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno dataUp to 2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray-+
Optimus-+
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Desktop Management+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 API
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
CUDA5.0+

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.

Quadro K620 5.79
+140%
GT 640M 2.41

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.

Quadro K620 2226
+140%
GT 640M 927

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro K620 6690
+110%
GT 640M 3184

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Quadro K620 5931
+117%
GT 640M 2732

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Quadro K620 6653
+202%
GT 640M 2200

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Quadro K620 19
+111%
GT 640M 9

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:

900p60−65
+131%
26
−131%
Full HD50−55
+127%
22
−127%
1200p45−50
+137%
19
−137%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.80no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

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

Full HD
High Preset

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

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 24
+0%
24
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
High Preset

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

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how Quadro K620 and GT 640M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro K620 is 131% faster in 900p
  • Quadro K620 is 127% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro K620 is 137% faster in 1200p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.79 2.41
Recency 22 July 2014 22 March 2012
Power consumption (TDP) 41 Watt 32 Watt

Quadro K620 has a 140.2% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.

GT 640M, on the other hand, has 28.1% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K620 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K620 is a workstation card while GeForce GT 640M is a notebook one.


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 Quadro K620
Quadro K620
NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M
GeForce GT 640M

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.


3.7 655 votes

Rate Quadro K620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 318 votes

Rate GeForce GT 640M 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.