Radeon RX 640 vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated667
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data8.11
ArchitectureGen. 3 (2005)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGMA 950Polaris 23
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 March 2005 (20 years ago)13 May 2019 (6 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 cores4640
Core clock speedno data1082 MHz
Boost clock speed250 MHz1218 MHz
Number of transistorsno data2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data48.72
Floating-point processing powerno data1.559 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data40
L1 Cacheno data160 KB
L2 Cacheno data512 KB

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 datalarge
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data48 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno dataNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectXno data12 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkan-1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 March 2005 13 May 2019
Chip lithography 130 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 50 Watt

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 has 614.3% lower power consumption.

RX 640, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 14 years, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 and Radeon RX 640. We've got no test results to judge.

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.


Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950
AMD Radeon RX 640
Radeon RX 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.


2.3 83 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 279 votes

Rate Radeon RX 640 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 or Radeon RX 640, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.