GeForce GT 640 vs Radeon Pro 450

Place in the ranking	551	768
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.20
Power efficiency	14.03	3.26
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Baffin	GK107
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	30 October 2016 (8 years ago)	5 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$99

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	640	384
Core clock speed	800 MHz	902 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	65 Watt
Texture fill rate	32.00	28.86
Floating-point processing power	1.024 TFLOPS	0.6927 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	40	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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	145 mm
Width	no data	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	GDDR5	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1270 MHz	891 MHz
Memory bandwidth	81.28 GB/s	28.51 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.1.126
CUDA	-	3.0

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. 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.

Pro 450 7.06
+131%

GT 640 3.05

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.

Pro 450 2722
+132%

GT 640 1175

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.

Pro 450 3252
+108%

GT 640 1560

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

27
+170%

10−12

−170%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

9.90

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−12

+175%

4−5
−175%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Battlefield 5	20−22 +150%	8−9 −150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +150%	6−7 −150%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Far Cry New Dawn	20−22 +150%	8−9 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +156%	18−20 −156%
Hitman 3	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +133%	18−20 −133%
Metro Exodus	20−22 +150%	8−9 −150%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +138%	8−9 −138%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +140%	10−11 −140%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +152%	21−24 −152%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Battlefield 5	20−22 +150%	8−9 −150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +150%	6−7 −150%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Far Cry New Dawn	20−22 +150%	8−9 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +156%	18−20 −156%
Hitman 3	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +133%	18−20 −133%
Metro Exodus	20−22 +150%	8−9 −150%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +138%	8−9 −138%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +140%	10−11 −140%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +133%	9−10 −133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +152%	21−24 −152%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +150%	6−7 −150%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +156%	18−20 −156%
Hitman 3	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +133%	18−20 −133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +140%	10−11 −140%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +133%	9−10 −133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +152%	21−24 −152%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

+138%

8−9
−138%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +150%	10−11 −150%
Hitman 3	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +150%	6−7 −150%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +150%	18−20 −150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

+140%

5−6
−140%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Hitman 3	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +144%	9−10 −144%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+133%

3−4

−133%

This is how Pro 450 and GT 640 compete in popular games:

Pro 450 is 170% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.06	3.05
Recency	30 October 2016	5 June 2012
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	65 Watt

Pro 450 has a 131.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 450 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 450 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GT 640 is a desktop one.

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