Radeon HD 7640G vs R7 260X
Aggregated performance score
R7 260X outperforms HD 7640G by 591% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 470 | 1019 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.24 | 0.04 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | Terascale 3 (2010−2013) |
| GPU code name | Bonaire | Trinity |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Design | reference | no data |
| Release date | 8 October 2013 (10 years ago) | 15 May 2012 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $139 | no data |
| Current price | $204 (1.5x MSRP) | $338 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
R7 260X has 3000% better value for money than HD 7640G.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 896 | 256 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 497 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 686 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,080 million | 1,303 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 61.60 | 10.96 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,971 gflops | no data |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Radeon R7 260X and Radeon HD 7640G compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | IGP |
| Length | 170 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin | no data |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | no data | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 104 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | no 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 Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| Eyefinity | 1 | no data |
| HDMI | + | no data |
| DisplayPort support | - | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| AppAcceleration | - | no data |
| Enduro | - | no data |
| FreeSync | 1 | no data |
| HD3D | - | no data |
| PowerTune | - | no data |
| TrueAudio | - | no data |
| ZeroCore | - | no data |
| DDMA audio | + | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | no data | N/A |
| Mantle | - | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance 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.
R7 260X outperforms HD 7640G by 591% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
R7 260X outperforms HD 7640G by 593% in Passmark.
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 HD | 65−70
+550%
| 10
−550%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.22 | 1.19 |
| Recency | 8 October 2013 | 15 May 2012 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | System Shared |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 35 Watt |
The Radeon R7 260X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7640G in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R7 260X is a desktop card while Radeon HD 7640G is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
