GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition vs GT 640

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 640 with GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition, including specs and performance data.

GT 640
2012
2 GB DDR3, 65 Watt
3.06

GT 750M Mac Edition outperforms GT 640 by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking769674
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.20no data
Power efficiency3.235.95
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK107GK107
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 June 2012 (12 years ago)8 November 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99 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 cores384384
Core clock speed902 MHz926 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate28.8629.63
Floating-point processing power0.6927 TFLOPS0.7112 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs3232

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 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed891 MHz1254 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/s80.26 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
CUDA3.03.0

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. 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.

GT 640 3.06
GT 750M Mac Edition 4.34
+41.8%

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.

GT 640 1178
GT 750M Mac Edition 1673
+42%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GT 640 1560
GT 750M Mac Edition 1837
+17.8%

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

GT 640 10
GT 750M Mac Edition 11
+5.1%

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 3.06 4.34
Recency 5 June 2012 8 November 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 50 Watt

GT 750M Mac Edition has a 41.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 30% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 640 is a desktop card while GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition 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
GeForce GT 640
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition
GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition

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.


3.4 1576 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 25 votes

Rate GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition 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.