GeForce GT 640M LE vs GTX 1650 SUPER

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER with GeForce GT 640M LE, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1650 SUPER
2019
4 GB GDDR6, 100 Watt
26.33
+1331%

GTX 1650 SUPER outperforms GT 640M LE by a whopping 1331% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking204911
Place by popularity56not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.04
Power efficiency18.233.98
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameTU116GF108
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date22 November 2019 (4 years ago)4 May 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$849.99

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 cores1280Up to 384
Core clock speed1530 MHzUp to 500 MHz
Boost clock speed1725 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,600 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate138.012.05
Floating-point processing power4.416 TFLOPS0.289 TFLOPS
ROPs324
TMUs8016

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
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR6DDR3\DDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128bit
Memory clock speed12000 MHz785 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/sUp to 28.8 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI++
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno dataUp to 2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray-+
Optimus-+
VR Ready+no data
Multi Monitor+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 API
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA7.5+

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 26.33
+1331%
GT 640M LE 1.84

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 10161
+1333%
GT 640M LE 709

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 18225
+1348%
GT 640M LE 1259

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 64463
+1014%
GT 640M LE 5788

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 55772
+2279%
GT 640M LE 2344

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 53337
+2281%
GT 640M LE 2240

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:

900p270−280
+1321%
19
−1321%
Full HD71
+274%
19
−274%
1440p37
+1750%
2−3
−1750%
4K22
+2100%
1−2
−2100%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data44.74
1440pno data425.00
4Kno data849.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 63
+1475%
4−5
−1475%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+714%
7−8
−714%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 53
+1667%
3−4
−1667%
Battlefield 5 85−90
+8500%
1−2
−8500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+980%
5−6
−980%
Cyberpunk 2077 50
+1150%
4−5
−1150%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+1900%
3−4
−1900%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+1260%
5−6
−1260%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+2057%
7−8
−2057%
Hitman 3 62
+933%
6−7
−933%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+606%
16−18
−606%
Metro Exodus 69
+1625%
4−5
−1625%
Red Dead Redemption 2 84
+2000%
4−5
−2000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95
+900%
9−10
−900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 180
+414%
35−40
−414%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+714%
7−8
−714%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 26
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Battlefield 5 85−90
+8500%
1−2
−8500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+980%
5−6
−980%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
+900%
4−5
−900%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+1900%
3−4
−1900%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+1260%
5−6
−1260%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+2057%
7−8
−2057%
Hitman 3 59
+883%
6−7
−883%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+606%
16−18
−606%
Metro Exodus 82
+1540%
5−6
−1540%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+1600%
4−5
−1600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 101
+1022%
9−10
−1022%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+367%
12−14
−367%
Watch Dogs: Legion 180
+414%
35−40
−414%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+714%
7−8
−714%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 15
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+980%
5−6
−980%
Cyberpunk 2077 34
+750%
4−5
−750%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+1900%
3−4
−1900%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+2057%
7−8
−2057%
Hitman 3 53
+783%
6−7
−783%
Horizon Zero Dawn 83
+388%
16−18
−388%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 83
+822%
9−10
−822%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50
+317%
12−14
−317%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21
−66.7%
35−40
+66.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 66
+1550%
4−5
−1550%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+2400%
2−3
−2400%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+1233%
3−4
−1233%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Cyberpunk 2077 20
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+1410%
10−11
−1410%
Hitman 3 34
+386%
7−8
−386%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60
+1100%
5−6
−1100%
Metro Exodus 55
+1733%
3−4
−1733%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60
+1400%
4−5
−1400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+3200%
1−2
−3200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 164
+1540%
10−11
−1540%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 44
+780%
5−6
−780%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Hitman 3 34
+1600%
2−3
−1600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
+1389%
9−10
−1389%
Metro Exodus 32
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 32
+1500%
2−3
−1500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3 0−1
Far Cry 5 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+1700%
2−3
−1700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21
+600%
3−4
−600%

This is how GTX 1650 SUPER and GT 640M LE compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 SUPER is 1321% faster in 900p
  • GTX 1650 SUPER is 274% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 SUPER is 1750% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 SUPER is 2100% faster in 4K

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1650 SUPER is 8500% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 640M LE is 67% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 SUPER is ahead in 52 tests (98%)
  • GT 640M LE is ahead in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 26.33 1.84
Recency 22 November 2019 4 May 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 20 Watt

GTX 1650 SUPER has a 1331% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

GT 640M LE, on the other hand, has 400% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640M LE in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is a desktop card while GeForce GT 640M LE 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 GTX 1650 SUPER
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M LE
GeForce GT 640M LE

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.


4.1 4649 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 58 votes

Rate GeForce GT 640M LE 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.