GeForce GT 640M LE vs Radeon R9 390

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 390 with GeForce GT 640M LE, including specs and performance data.

R9 390
2015, $329
0 MB GDDR5, 275 Watt
21.07
+1177%

R9 390 outperforms 640M LE by a whopping 1177% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking304993
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation10.120.02
Power efficiency5.903.97
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGrenadaGF108
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (10 years ago)4 May 2012 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$329 $849.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

R9 390 has 50500% better value for money than GT 640M LE.

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 cores2560Up to 384
Core clock speedno dataUp to 500 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,200 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate160.012.05
Floating-point processing power5.12 TFLOPS0.289 TFLOPS
ROPs644
TMUs16016
L1 Cache640 KB128 KB
L2 Cache1024 KB256 KB

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 supportPCIe 3.0PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pinno data
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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\DDR5
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount0 MB2 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit128bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz785 MHz
Memory bandwidth384 GB/sUp to 28.8 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI++
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data
3D Blu-Ray-+
Optimus-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 API
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan+N/A
Mantle+-
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R9 390 21.07
+1177%
GT 640M LE 1.65

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.

R9 390 8808
+1178%
Samples: 3380
GT 640M LE 689
Samples: 374

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:

900p240−250
+1163%
19
−1163%
Full HD260−270
+1138%
21
−1138%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.27
+3099%
40.48
−3099%
  • R9 390 has 3099% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how R9 390 and GT 640M LE compete in popular games:

  • R9 390 is 1163% faster in 900p
  • R9 390 is 1138% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 49 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 21.07 1.65
Recency 18 June 2015 4 May 2012
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 20 Watt

R9 390 has a 1177% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 640M LE, on the other hand, has 1275% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 390 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640M LE in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 390 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce GT 640M LE is a notebook 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.


AMD Radeon R9 390
Radeon R9 390
NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M LE
GeForce GT 640M LE

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.


4.2 656 votes

Rate Radeon R9 390 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 63 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 390 or GeForce GT 640M LE, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.