GeForce GT 640 vs FirePro D300
Aggregate performance score
We've compared FirePro D300 with GeForce GT 640, including specs and performance data.
D300 outperforms GT 640 by a whopping 229% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 459 | 783 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.20 |
| Power efficiency | 4.59 | 3.22 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2011−2020) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | Pitcairn | GK107 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 18 January 2014 (11 years ago) | 5 June 2012 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 cores | 1280 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 902 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,800 million | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 68.00 | 28.86 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.176 TFLOPS | 0.6927 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 16 |
| TMUs | 80 | 32 |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 242 mm | 145 mm |
| Width | 1-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1270 MHz | 891 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 162.6 GB/s | 28.51 GB/s |
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 | 4x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | - | 3.0 |
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.
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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.04 | 3.05 |
| Recency | 18 January 2014 | 5 June 2012 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 65 Watt |
FirePro D300 has a 229.2% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.
GT 640, on the other hand, has 130.8% lower power consumption.
The FirePro D300 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640 in performance tests.
Be aware that FirePro D300 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GT 640 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
