GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2 vs HD Graphics 530

Place in the ranking	816	720
Place by popularity	97	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.19
Power efficiency	11.95	5.01
Architecture	Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)	Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code name	Skylake GT2	GK208
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	1 September 2015 (9 years ago)	29 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$89

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 cores	192	384
Core clock speed	350 MHz	1046 MHz
Boost clock speed	950 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	189 million	915 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm+	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	49 Watt
Texture fill rate	22.80	33.47
Floating-point processing power	0.3648 TFLOPS	0.8033 TFLOPS
ROPs	3	8
TMUs	24	32

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).

Interface	Ring Bus	PCIe 2.0 x8
Length	no data	145 mm
Width	IGP	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	DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	64 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	1252 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	40.06 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 Connectors	Portable Device Dependent	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	1.2
Vulkan	+	1.1.126
CUDA	-	3.5

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 HD	13 −23.1%	16−18 +23.1%
4K	7 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	5.56
4K	no data	9.89

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6

−20%

6−7
+20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −23.1%	16−18 +23.1%
Hitman 3	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −28.6%	27−30 +28.6%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	13 −23.1%	16−18 +23.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −31.6%	50−55 +31.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −23.1%	16−18 +23.1%
Hitman 3	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −28.6%	27−30 +28.6%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	13 −23.1%	16−18 +23.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −31.6%	50−55 +31.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −23.1%	16−18 +23.1%
Hitman 3	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −28.6%	27−30 +28.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −31.6%	50−55 +31.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

−33.3%

8−9
+33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Hitman 3	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

−33.3%

8−9
+33.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−25%

5−6
+25%

This is how HD Graphics 530 and GT 640 Rev. 2 compete in popular games:

GT 640 Rev. 2 is 23% faster in 1080p
GT 640 Rev. 2 is 29% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.59	3.55
Recency	1 September 2015	29 May 2013
Maximum RAM amount	64 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	49 Watt

HD Graphics 530 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 226.7% lower power consumption.

GT 640 Rev. 2, on the other hand, has a 37.1% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 530 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.