GeForce MX450 vs GT 640M LE

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 640M LE and GeForce MX450, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 640M LE
2012
2 GB DDR3\DDR5, 20 Watt
1.84

MX450 outperforms GT 640M LE by a whopping 427% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking916458
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.06no data
Power efficiency4.0127.03
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGF108N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date4 May 2012 (12 years ago)1 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$849.99 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 coresUp to 384896
Core clock speedUp to 500 MHz1395 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1575 MHz
Number of transistors585 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt25 Watt (12 - 29 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate12.05100.8
Floating-point processing power0.289 TFLOPS3.226 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs1664

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR3\DDR5GDDR5, GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed785 MHz10000 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 28.8 GB/s64.03 GB/s
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolutionUp to 2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray+-
Optimus++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA+7.5

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 640M LE 1.84
GeForce MX450 9.69
+427%

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 640M LE 709
GeForce MX450 3737
+427%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GT 640M LE 1259
GeForce MX450 8250
+555%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 640M LE 5788
GeForce MX450 22831
+294%

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.

GT 640M LE 2344
GeForce MX450 29036
+1139%

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.

GT 640M LE 2240
GeForce MX450 27944
+1148%

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:

900p19
−426%
100−110
+426%
Full HD20
−40%
28
+40%
1440p3−4
−533%
19
+533%
4K5−6
−460%
28
+460%

Cost per frame, $

1080p42.50no data
1440p283.33no data
4K170.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−700%
32
+700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−229%
21−24
+229%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−300%
20−22
+300%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−450%
22
+450%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−633%
21−24
+633%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−440%
27−30
+440%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−814%
60−65
+814%
Hitman 3 6−7
−400%
30
+400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−212%
50−55
+212%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1025%
45
+1025%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−256%
30−35
+256%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−169%
94
+169%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−229%
21−24
+229%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−300%
20−22
+300%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−225%
13
+225%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−633%
21−24
+633%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−440%
27−30
+440%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−814%
60−65
+814%
Hitman 3 6−7
−383%
29
+383%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−212%
50−55
+212%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−575%
27−30
+575%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−344%
40
+344%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−117%
24−27
+117%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−154%
89
+154%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−229%
21−24
+229%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−300%
20−22
+300%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−100%
8
+100%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−633%
21−24
+633%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−814%
60−65
+814%
Hitman 3 6−7
−317%
25
+317%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−41.2%
24
+41.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−233%
30
+233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−66.7%
20
+66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+400%
7
−400%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−675%
31
+675%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−850%
18−20
+850%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%
Hitman 3 7−8
−157%
18
+157%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−300%
20−22
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
−510%
60−65
+510%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−420%
26
+420%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−600%
7−8
+600%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 4−5
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 3−4

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10
+0%
10
+0%
Metro Exodus 55
+0%
55
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6
+0%
6
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 11
+0%
11
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7
+0%
7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18
+0%
18
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how GT 640M LE and GeForce MX450 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX450 is 426% faster in 900p
  • GeForce MX450 is 40% faster in 1080p
  • GeForce MX450 is 533% faster in 1440p
  • GeForce MX450 is 460% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 640M LE is 400% faster.
  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX450 is 2900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 640M LE is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • GeForce MX450 is ahead in 52 tests (74%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (24%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.84 9.69
Recency 4 May 2012 1 August 2020
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 25 Watt

GT 640M LE has 25% lower power consumption.

GeForce MX450, on the other hand, has a 426.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce MX450 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640M LE in performance tests.


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 640M LE
GeForce GT 640M LE
NVIDIA GeForce MX450
GeForce MX450

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.


3.3 58 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 1306 votes

Rate GeForce MX450 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.