ATI Radeon 7000 vs GeForce GT 640M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 640M with Radeon 7000, including specs and performance data.
GT 640M outperforms ATI 7000 by a whopping 23300% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 852 | 1540 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 5.21 | 0.03 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | Rage 6 (2000−2007) |
| GPU code name | GK107 | RV100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 22 March 2012 (12 years ago) | 19 February 2001 (23 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 cores | 384 | no data |
| Core clock speed | Up to 625 MHz | 183 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 645 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,270 million | 30 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 180 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 32 Watt | 23 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 20.00 | 0.55 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.48 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 1 |
| TMUs | 32 | 3 |
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 size | medium sized | no data |
| Bus support | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | AGP 4x |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 type | DDR3\GDDR5 | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 32 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 183 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | Up to 64.0 GB/s | 2.928 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no 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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video |
| HDMI | + | - |
| HDCP | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | Up to 2048x1536 | no 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 and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 API | 7.0 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 1.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | N/A |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | N/A |
| CUDA | + | - |
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.
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.
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:
| 900p | 26 | -0−1 |
| Full HD | 22 | -0−1 |
| 1200p | 19 | -0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 13 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 8 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24 | 0−1 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| World of Tanks | 49 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 24 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18 | 0−1 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| World of Tanks | 16−18 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 9−10 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 16−18 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.34 | 0.01 |
| Recency | 22 March 2012 | 19 February 2001 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 180 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 32 Watt | 23 Watt |
GT 640M has a 23300% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.
ATI 7000, on the other hand, has 39.1% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GT 640M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 7000 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GT 640M is a notebook card while Radeon 7000 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
