Radeon Pro 5500M vs GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition with Radeon Pro 5500M, including specs and performance data.

GT 640M Mac Edition
2013
512 MB GDDR5, 32 Watt
0.90

Pro 5500M outperforms GT 640M Mac Edition by a whopping 1589% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1109321
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.2214.13
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameGK107Navi 14
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date3 February 2013 (12 years ago)13 November 2019 (5 years ago)

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 cores3841536
Core clock speed745 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1450 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)32 Watt85 Watt
Texture fill rate23.84139.2
Floating-point processing power0.5722 TFLOPS4.454 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs3296

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth40 GB/s192.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA3.0-

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 HD3−4
−1800%
57
+1800%
1440p3−4
−1867%
59
+1867%
4K1−2
−3100%
32
+3100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Battlefield 5 76
+0%
76
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 31
+0%
31
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Battlefield 5 62
+0%
62
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 208
+0%
208
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Dota 2 111
+0%
111
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 69
+0%
69
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
+0%
68
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Dota 2 107
+0%
107
+0%
Far Cry 5 55
+0%
55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 39
+0%
39
+0%
Valorant 28
+0%
28
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 118
+0%
118
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35
+0%
35
+0%
Metro Exodus 22
+0%
22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 107
+0%
107
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 47
+0%
47
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 40
+0%
40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 71
+0%
71
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 25
+0%
25
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14
+0%
14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 54
+0%
54
+0%
Far Cry 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how GT 640M Mac Edition and Pro 5500M compete in popular games:

  • Pro 5500M is 1800% faster in 1080p
  • Pro 5500M is 1867% faster in 1440p
  • Pro 5500M is 3100% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.90 15.20
Recency 3 February 2013 13 November 2019
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 32 Watt 85 Watt

GT 640M Mac Edition has 165.6% lower power consumption.

Pro 5500M, on the other hand, has a 1588.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro 5500M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro 5500M is a mobile workstation one.

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 Mac Edition
GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition
AMD Radeon Pro 5500M
Radeon Pro 5500M

Other comparisons

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.


3.1 9 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 275 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 5500M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition or Radeon Pro 5500M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.