GeForce GT 640M LE vs Radeon R9 M385X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M385X and GeForce GT 640M LE, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 M385X
2015
4 GB GDDR5
5.17
+181%

R9 M385X outperforms GT 640M LE by a whopping 181% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking618916
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.06
Power efficiencyno data4.01
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameStratoGF108
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)4 May 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$849.99

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 cores896Up to 384
Core clock speed1000 MHzUp to 500 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,080 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data20 Watt
Texture fill rate61.6012.05
Floating-point processing power1.971 TFLOPS0.289 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs5616

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 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 typeGDDR5DDR3\DDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz785 MHz
Memory bandwidth76.8 GB/sUp to 28.8 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
Eyefinity+-
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.

FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-
3D Blu-Ray-+
Optimus-+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 API
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.44.5
OpenCLNot Listed1.1
Vulkan-N/A
Mantle+-
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.

R9 M385X 5.17
+181%
GT 640M LE 1.84

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.

R9 M385X 1993
+181%
GT 640M LE 709

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.

R9 M385X 5515
+338%
GT 640M LE 1259

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.

R9 M385X 12453
+115%
GT 640M LE 5788

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:

900p50−55
+163%
19
−163%
Full HD27
+35%
20
−35%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data42.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+371%
7−8
−371%
Hitman 3 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+94.1%
16−18
−94.1%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+371%
7−8
−371%
Hitman 3 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+94.1%
16−18
−94.1%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 41
+242%
12−14
−242%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+371%
7−8
−371%
Hitman 3 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+94.1%
16−18
−94.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Hitman 3 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+230%
10−11
−230%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%

This is how R9 M385X and GT 640M LE compete in popular games:

  • R9 M385X is 163% faster in 900p
  • R9 M385X is 35% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R9 M385X is 1200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, R9 M385X surpassed GT 640M LE in all 53 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.17 1.84
Recency 5 May 2015 4 May 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm

R9 M385X has a 181% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R9 M385X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640M LE in performance tests.


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 R9 M385X
Radeon R9 M385X
NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M LE
GeForce GT 640M LE

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.5 4 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M385X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 58 votes

Rate GeForce GT 640M LE 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.