GeForce GT 625M vs Radeon HD 7640G

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 7640G and GeForce GT 625M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 7640G
2012
35 Watt
1.19

GT 625M outperforms HD 7640G by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10601043
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.345.69
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameDevastator LiteGF117
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 May 2012 (12 years ago)1 October 2012 (12 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 cores25696
Core clock speed496 MHzUp to 625 MHz
Boost clock speed685 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,303 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate10.9610.00
Floating-point processing power0.3507 TFLOPS0.24 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs1616

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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0
InterfaceIGPPCIe 2.0 x16

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 typeSystem SharedDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared2 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared900 MHz
Memory bandwidthno dataUp to 14.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo 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-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 API
Shader Model5.05.1
OpenGL4.44.5
OpenCL1.21.1
VulkanN/AN/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. 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.

HD 7640G 1.19
GT 625M 1.24
+4.2%

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.

HD 7640G 458
GT 625M 478
+4.4%

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.

HD 7640G 656
GT 625M 921
+40.5%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Elden Ring 0−1 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Elden Ring 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
World of Tanks 24−27
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
World of Tanks 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

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

  • in World of Tanks, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 625M is 17% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 625M is ahead in 6 tests (15%)
  • there's a draw in 35 tests (85%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.19 1.24
Recency 15 May 2012 1 October 2012
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

GT 625M has a 4.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon HD 7640G and GeForce GT 625M.


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.


AMD Radeon HD 7640G
Radeon HD 7640G
NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M
GeForce GT 625M

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.


2.9 166 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7640G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 33 votes

Rate GeForce GT 625M 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.