Radeon RX Vega 3 vs GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2 with Radeon RX Vega 3, including specs and performance data.

GT 640 Rev. 2
2013
1 GB GDDR5, 49 Watt
3.55
+19.1%

GT 640 Rev. 2 outperforms RX Vega 3 by a moderate 19% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking724779
Place by popularitynot in top-10085
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.19no data
Power efficiency4.9613.61
ArchitectureKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGK208Picasso
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date29 May 2013 (11 years ago)6 January 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$89 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores384192
Core clock speed1046 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1001 MHz
Number of transistors915 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)49 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate33.4712.01
Floating-point processing power0.8033 TFLOPS0.3844 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs3212

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x8IGP
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1252 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth40.06 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGANo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA3.5-

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 HD14−16
+16.7%
12
−16.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.36no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7
+0%
7
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6
+0%
6
+0%
Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6
+0%
6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hitman 3 5
+0%
5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 7
+0%
7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6
+0%
6
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
+0%
11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
+0%
17
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9
+0%
9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9
+0%
9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
+0%
4
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how GT 640 Rev. 2 and RX Vega 3 compete in popular games:

  • GT 640 Rev. 2 is 17% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.55 2.98
Recency 29 May 2013 6 January 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 49 Watt 15 Watt

GT 640 Rev. 2 has a 19.1% higher aggregate performance score.

RX Vega 3, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 226.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 3 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2 is a desktop card while Radeon RX Vega 3 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2
GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2
AMD Radeon RX Vega 3
Radeon RX Vega 3

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.9 27 votes

Rate GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 2002 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.