GeForce GT 640 vs GTX 1660 Super

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1660 Super and GeForce GT 640, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1660 Super
2019
6 GB GDDR6, 125 Watt
28.45
+986%

GTX 1660 Super outperforms GT 640 by a whopping 986% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking174789
Place by popularity8not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation52.050.20
Power efficiency18.053.20
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameTU116GK107
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date29 October 2019 (5 years ago)5 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 $99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

GTX 1660 Super has 25925% better value for money than GT 640.

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 cores1408384
Core clock speed1530 MHz902 MHz
Boost clock speed1785 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,600 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate157.128.86
Floating-point processing power5.027 TFLOPS0.6927 TFLOPS
ROPs4816
TMUs8832

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length229 mm145 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

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
Maximum RAM amount6 GB2 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz891 MHz
Memory bandwidth336.0 GB/s28.51 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI++
HDCP+-
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

NVENC+no data
Ansel+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA7.53.0

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.

GTX 1660 Super 28.45
+986%
GT 640 2.62

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 1660 Super 12714
+985%
GT 640 1172

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 1660 Super 15995
+925%
GT 640 1560

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 1660 Super 62640
+1565%
GT 640 3762

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 1660 Super 60422
+1526%
GT 640 3717

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

GTX 1660 Super 65044
+2180%
GT 640 2853

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 HD89
+1013%
8−9
−1013%
1440p55
+1000%
5−6
−1000%
4K30
+1400%
2−3
−1400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.57
+381%
12.38
−381%
1440p4.16
+376%
19.80
−376%
4K7.63
+548%
49.50
−548%
  • GTX 1660 Super has 381% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Super has 376% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 Super has 548% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 124
+1140%
10−11
−1140%
Counter-Strike 2 285
+1088%
24−27
−1088%
Cyberpunk 2077 76
+1167%
6−7
−1167%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 91
+1038%
8−9
−1038%
Battlefield 5 97
+1113%
8−9
−1113%
Counter-Strike 2 243
+1057%
21−24
−1057%
Cyberpunk 2077 63
+1160%
5−6
−1160%
Far Cry 5 112
+1020%
10−11
−1020%
Fortnite 140−150
+1075%
12−14
−1075%
Forza Horizon 4 144
+1100%
12−14
−1100%
Forza Horizon 5 108
+1100%
9−10
−1100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+1130%
10−11
−1130%
Valorant 321
+1089%
27−30
−1089%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 52
+1200%
4−5
−1200%
Battlefield 5 83
+1086%
7−8
−1086%
Counter-Strike 2 119
+1090%
10−11
−1090%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+1042%
24−27
−1042%
Cyberpunk 2077 52
+1200%
4−5
−1200%
Dota 2 231
+1000%
21−24
−1000%
Far Cry 5 103
+1044%
9−10
−1044%
Fortnite 140−150
+1075%
12−14
−1075%
Forza Horizon 4 135
+1025%
12−14
−1025%
Forza Horizon 5 94
+1075%
8−9
−1075%
Grand Theft Auto V 133
+1008%
12−14
−1008%
Metro Exodus 56
+1020%
5−6
−1020%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 139
+1058%
12−14
−1058%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 113
+1030%
10−11
−1030%
Valorant 290
+1108%
24−27
−1108%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 77
+1000%
7−8
−1000%
Cyberpunk 2077 49
+1125%
4−5
−1125%
Dota 2 211
+1072%
18−20
−1072%
Far Cry 5 95
+1088%
8−9
−1088%
Forza Horizon 4 107
+1089%
9−10
−1089%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 104
+1056%
9−10
−1056%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 61
+1120%
5−6
−1120%
Valorant 122
+1120%
10−11
−1120%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 140−150
+1075%
12−14
−1075%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 67
+1017%
6−7
−1017%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+1083%
18−20
−1083%
Grand Theft Auto V 62
+1140%
5−6
−1140%
Metro Exodus 36
+1100%
3−4
−1100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 162
+1057%
14−16
−1057%
Valorant 262
+992%
24−27
−992%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60
+1100%
5−6
−1100%
Cyberpunk 2077 26
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Far Cry 5 65
+1200%
5−6
−1200%
Forza Horizon 4 84
+1100%
7−8
−1100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+1000%
5−6
−1000%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+1014%
7−8
−1014%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Counter-Strike 2 16
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Grand Theft Auto V 60
+1100%
5−6
−1100%
Metro Exodus 22
+1000%
2−3
−1000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40
+1233%
3−4
−1233%
Valorant 132
+1000%
12−14
−1000%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 36
+1100%
3−4
−1100%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+1033%
3−4
−1033%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Dota 2 95
+1088%
8−9
−1088%
Far Cry 5 33
+1000%
3−4
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 54
+1250%
4−5
−1250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 36
+1100%
3−4
−1100%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+1133%
3−4
−1133%

This is how GTX 1660 Super and GT 640 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Super is 1013% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Super is 1000% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1660 Super is 1400% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.45 2.62
Recency 29 October 2019 5 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 65 Watt

GTX 1660 Super has a 985.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

GT 640, on the other hand, has 92.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1660 Super is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640 in performance tests.

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 1660 Super
GeForce GTX 1660 Super
NVIDIA GeForce GT 640
GeForce GT 640

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.


4.3 21631 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 Super on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 1632 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 1660 Super or GeForce GT 640, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.