Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 9000) vs GeForce GT 640

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking769not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.20no data
Power efficiency3.23no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)RDNA 3+
GPU code nameGK107no data
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 June 2012 (12 years ago)no data
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 cores384128
Core clock speed902 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data2200 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nmno data
Power consumption (TDP)65 Wattno data
Texture fill rate28.86no data
Floating-point processing power0.6927 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no data

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 x16no data
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 typeDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed891 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/sno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortno data
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12_2
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126-
CUDA3.0-

Pros & cons summary


We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 640 and Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 9000). We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GT 640 is a desktop card while Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 9000) 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
AMD Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 9000)
Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 9000)

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
5 3 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 9000) 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.