Radeon 780M vs HD 7640G

Place in the ranking	1060	305
Place by popularity	not in top-100	48
Power efficiency	2.34	83.89
Architecture	TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Devastator Lite	Hawx Point
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	15 May 2012 (12 years ago)	6 December 2023 (1 year 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 cores	256	768
Core clock speed	496 MHz	800 MHz
Boost clock speed	685 MHz	2700 MHz
Number of transistors	1,303 million	25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology	32 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	10.96	129.6
Floating-point processing power	0.3507 TFLOPS	8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	32
TMUs	16	48
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	12

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 size	medium sized	no data
Interface	IGP	PCIe 4.0 x8
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	System Shared	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	System Shared
Memory bus width	System Shared	System Shared
Memory clock speed	System Shared	System Shared
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

No outputs

Portable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.0	6.8
OpenGL	4.4	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.1
Vulkan	N/A	1.3

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

Radeon 780M 18.28
+1436%

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

Radeon 780M 7029
+1435%

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

Radeon 780M 12785
+1850%

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.

HD 7640G 2599

Radeon 780M 41622
+1501%

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	2−3 −1700%	36 +1700%
1440p	1−2 −1800%	19 +1800%
4K	0−1	13

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −256%	32 +256%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1200%	39 +1200%
Elden Ring	0−1	37

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −5800%	55−60 +5800%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −189%	26 +189%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −400%	15 +400%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −713%	65 +713%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −617%	40−45 +617%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −5800%	55−60 +5800%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −178%	25 +178%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −300%	12 +300%
Dota 2	1−2 −2800%	29 +2800%
Elden Ring	0−1	42
Far Cry 5	10−11 −220%	32 +220%
Fortnite	5−6 −1860%	95−100 +1860%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −575%	54 +575%
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2 −4400%	45 +4400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 −869%	120−130 +869%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −617%	40−45 +617%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −714%	55−60 +714%
World of Tanks	24−27 −746%	220−230 +746%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −5800%	55−60 +5800%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −256%	30−35 +256%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −300%	12 +300%
Dota 2	1−2 −6400%	65−70 +6400%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −530%	60−65 +530%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −475%	46 +475%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 −869%	120−130 +869%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 −2271%	160−170 +2271%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	16−18
World of Tanks	6−7 −1983%	120−130 +1983%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −66.7%	14−16 +66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −600%	14−16 +600%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −860%	45−50 +860%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −900%	20 +900%
Valorant	6−7 −683%	45−50 +683%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −31.3%	21 +31.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −40%	21 +40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	3−4 −1733%	55−60 +1733%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	12−14
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −40%	21 +40%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −1700%	18−20 +1700%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −400%	5−6 +400%
Dota 2	16−18 −93.8%	30−35 +93.8%
Far Cry 5	0−1	21−24
Valorant	1−2 −2000%	21−24 +2000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Metro Exodus	44 +0%	44 +0%
Valorant	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Metro Exodus	32 +0%	32 +0%
Valorant	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Valorant

70−75

+0%

70−75

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	18 +0%	18 +0%
Elden Ring	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	19 +0%	19 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	32 +0%	32 +0%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Elden Ring	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Fortnite	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	17 +0%	17 +0%

This is how HD 7640G and Radeon 780M compete in popular games:

Radeon 780M is 1700% faster in 1080p
Radeon 780M is 1800% faster in 1440p

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

in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 780M is 6400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Radeon 780M is ahead in 41 test (71%)
there's a draw in 17 tests (29%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.19	18.28
Recency	15 May 2012	6 December 2023
Chip lithography	32 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	15 Watt

Radeon 780M has a 1436.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 700% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 780M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7640G in performance tests.

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