GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition vs Radeon HD 7640G

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 7640G and GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 7640G
2012
35 Watt
1.09

GT 650M Mac Edition outperforms HD 7640G by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11071010
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.372.44
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameDevastator LiteGK107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 May 2012 (13 years ago)12 July 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 cores256384
Core clock speed496 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed685 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,303 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate10.9628.80
Floating-point processing power0.3507 TFLOPS0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs1632

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceIGPPCIe 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared512 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1254 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data80.26 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

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.05.1
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.21.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
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 HD10
−20%
12−14
+20%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Valorant 30−35
−25%
40−45
+25%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
−15.4%
30−33
+15.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Valorant 30−35
−25%
40−45
+25%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Valorant 30−35
−25%
40−45
+25%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

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 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

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

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Valorant 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how HD 7640G and GT 650M Mac Edition compete in popular games:

  • GT 650M Mac Edition is 20% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.09 1.44
Recency 15 May 2012 12 July 2012
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 45 Watt

HD 7640G has 28.6% lower power consumption.

GT 650M Mac Edition, on the other hand, has a 32.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 month, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7640G 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.


AMD Radeon HD 7640G
Radeon HD 7640G
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition
GeForce GT 650M 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.


2.9 169 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 22 votes

Rate GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 7640G or GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.