GeForce GT 640M vs Quadro M620

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M620 with GeForce GT 640M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M620
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
7.03
+197%

M620 outperforms GT 640M by a whopping 197% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking554852
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency16.465.20
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGM107GK107
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date11 January 2017 (8 years ago)22 March 2012 (12 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 cores512384
Core clock speed756 MHzUp to 625 MHz
Boost clock speed977 MHz645 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt32 Watt
Texture fill rate31.2620.00
Floating-point processing power1 TFLOPS0.48 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs3232

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
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
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 typeGDDR5DDR3\GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/sUp to 64.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno dataUp to 2048x1536
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray-+
Optimus++
3D Stereo+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 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.

Quadro M620 7.03
+197%
GT 640M 2.37

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 M620 2765
+197%
GT 640M 931

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Quadro M620 3801
+120%
GT 640M 1728

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.

Quadro M620 17237
+132%
GT 640M 7425

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Quadro M620 3130
+156%
GT 640M 1225

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Quadro M620 22120
+145%
GT 640M 9024

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 M620 8002
+151%
GT 640M 3188

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 M620 6407
+135%
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 M620 8602
+291%
GT 640M 2200

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:

900p70−75
+192%
24
−192%
Full HD26
+18.2%
22
−18.2%
1200p55−60
+189%
19
−189%
4K10
+233%
3−4
−233%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+314%
7−8
−314%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Fortnite 40−45
+273%
10−12
−273%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+173%
10−12
−173%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+108%
12−14
−108%
Valorant 70−75
+78%
40−45
−78%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+314%
7−8
−314%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+124%
49
−124%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Dota 2 50−55
+112%
25
−112%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Fortnite 40−45
+273%
10−12
−273%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+173%
10−12
−173%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+213%
8
−213%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+108%
12−14
−108%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+138%
8−9
−138%
Valorant 70−75
+78%
40−45
−78%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+314%
7−8
−314%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Dota 2 50−55
+121%
24
−121%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+173%
10−12
−173%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+108%
12−14
−108%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+25%
8−9
−25%
Valorant 70−75
+78%
40−45
−78%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+273%
10−12
−273%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
+225%
16−18
−225%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+129%
16−18
−129%
Valorant 75−80
+305%
18−20
−305%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Valorant 30−35
+183%
12−14
−183%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 24−27
+380%
5−6
−380%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%

This is how Quadro M620 and GT 640M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M620 is 192% faster in 900p
  • Quadro M620 is 18% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M620 is 189% faster in 1200p
  • Quadro M620 is 233% faster in 4K

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro M620 is 900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Quadro M620 surpassed GT 640M in all 59 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.03 2.37
Recency 11 January 2017 22 March 2012
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 32 Watt

Quadro M620 has a 196.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and 6.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M620 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M620 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GT 640M 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 M620
Quadro M620
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.


3.3 196 votes

Rate Quadro M620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 319 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M620 or GeForce GT 640M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.