GeForce GT 640M LE vs NVS 510

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce GT 640M LE is positioned at rank 386 and the NVS 510 is on rank 321, so the NVS 510 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 640M LE

#376

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

1246%

#378

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

1130%

#379

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

1127%

#383

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

1025%

#384

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

1018%

#386

GeForce GT 640M LE

MSRP: $80|Avg: $20

100%

#387

Radeon Vega 8 Ryzen 5 3450U

MSRP: $150|Avg: $40

100%

#388

GeForce GT 755M Mac Edition

MSRP: $200|Avg: $50

99%

#389

HD Graphics 520

MSRP: $100|Avg: $35

99%

#390

Radeon HD 8600/8700M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30

99%

#391

Radeon R9 M395X

MSRP: $600|Avg: $150

98%

#393

Radeon R9 M485X

MSRP: $450|Avg: $150

97%

#394

Radeon HD 8570D + HD 6670 Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $100

97%

#395

Radeon HD 6650A

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

96%

#396

GeForce 920A

MSRP: $100|Avg: $15

95%

#397

GeForce 930A

MSRP: $150|Avg: $20

95%

#398

Mobility Radeon HD 4650

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

94%

#400

Radeon R9 M290X

MSRP: $400|Avg: $60

92%

#401

Radeon HD 7670

MSRP: $100|Avg: $25

92%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar NVS 510

#306

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

9783%

#321

NVS 510

MSRP: $449|Avg: $15

100%

#322

GRID M60-1Q

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $50

98%

#323

GRID K280Q

MSRP: $2000|Avg: $50

94%

#324

FirePro M2000

MSRP: $300|Avg: $50

94%

#325

Tesla K20c

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $500

92%

#326

GRID M6-1Q

MSRP: $1500|Avg: $100

91%

#327

Quadro FX 380

MSRP: $129|Avg: $15

91%

#328

Tesla C2050 / C2070

MSRP: $2499|Avg: $30

91%

#329

FirePro M7740

MSRP: $500|Avg: $500

88%

#330

Quadro FX 570

MSRP: $199|Avg: $15

86%

#331

RTXA5000-24Q

MSRP: $3721|Avg: $2100

85%

#332

GRID P40-1Q

MSRP: $3000|Avg: $150

85%

#334

Tesla C2050

MSRP: $2499|Avg: $95

84%

#335

Tesla M10

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $500

84%

#336

FirePro S10000

MSRP: $3599|Avg: $500

83%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GT 640M LE is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.5% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the NVS 510.

Insight	GeForce GT 640M LE	NVS 510
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+2.5%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.5%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The NVS 510 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the NVS 510 holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $20), it costs 25% less, resulting in a 30.1% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce GT 640M LE	NVS 510
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+30.1%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($20)	✅More affordable ($15)

Performance Check

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

GeForce GT 640M LE Benchmark Check

NVS 510 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GT 640M LE and NVS 510

GeForce GT 640M LE

The GeForce GT 640M LE is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 22 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from Up to 625 MHz to 645 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 32W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 697 points.

NVS 510

The NVS 510 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 4 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 902 MHz to 1033 MHz. It has 512 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 68W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 680 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GT 640M LE scores 697 and the NVS 510 reaches 680 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GT 640M LE is built on Kepler while the NVS 510 uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GT 640M LE) vs 512 (NVS 510). Raw compute: 0.48 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 640M LE) vs 1.058 TFLOPS ×2 (NVS 510). Boost clocks: 645 MHz vs 1033 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GT 640M LE	NVS 510
G3D Mark Score	697+3%	680
Architecture	Kepler	Maxwell
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	384	512 ×2+33%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.48 TFLOPS	1.058 TFLOPS ×2+120%
Boost Clock	645 MHz	1033 MHz+60%
ROPs	16	16 ×2
TMUs	32	32 ×2
L1 Cache	32 KB	256 KB+700%
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GT 640M LE	NVS 510
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GT 640M LE) vs 1 MB (NVS 510) — the NVS 510 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GT 640M LE	NVS 510
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (GeForce GT 640M LE) vs 12 (11_0) (NVS 510). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GT 640M LE	NVS 510
DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (11_0)
Vulkan	1.2	1.2
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st Gen (GeForce GT 640M LE) vs 1st Gen NVENC (NVS 510). Decoder: VP5 vs 1st Gen NVDEC (VP5). Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,MPEG-4 (GeForce GT 640M LE) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (NVS 510).

Feature	GeForce GT 640M LE	NVS 510
Encoder	NVENC 1st Gen	1st Gen NVENC
Decoder	VP5	1st Gen NVDEC (VP5)
Codecs	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,MPEG-4	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GT 640M LE draws 32W versus the NVS 510's 68W — a 72% difference. The GeForce GT 640M LE is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GT 640M LE) vs 350W (NVS 510). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 160mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 85 vs 65°C.

Feature	GeForce GT 640M LE	NVS 510
TDP	32W-53%	68W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	0mm	160mm
Height	0mm	69mm
Slots	0-100%	1
Temp (Load)	85	65°C-24%
Perf/Watt	21.8+118%	10.0

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GT 640M LE launched at $80 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the NVS 510 launched at $449 and now averages $15. The NVS 510 costs 25% less ($5 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 34.9 (GeForce GT 640M LE) vs 45.3 (NVS 510) — the NVS 510 offers 29.8% better value. The NVS 510 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2012).