GeForce GT 640M vs Radeon R5 340

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.

GeForce GT 640M vs Radeon R5 340 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce GT 640M vs Radeon R5 340: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce GT 640M

2012

Why buy it

✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (2 GB vs 512 MB).
✅Draws 32W instead of 50W, a 18W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon R5 340 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌2012 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 9.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $99 MSRP).

Radeon R5 340

2017

Why buy it

✅52.5% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 9.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($99 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅More future proof: GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) on 14nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 2 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2017 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌56.3% higher power demand at 50W vs 32W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Radeon R5 340 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 52.5% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 3.1% in PassMark G3D (935 vs 907), so the answer here is pretty clean.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GT 640M is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 2 GB vs 512 MB of VRAM. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon R5 340 makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Radeon R5 340 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, GeForce GT 640M has the stronger long-term case.

GeForce GT 640M vs Radeon R5 340 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GeForce GT 640M

The GeForce GT 640M 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: 907 points.

Radeon R5 340

The Radeon R5 340 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 20 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1183 MHz to 1124 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 935 points. Launch price was $79.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GT 640M scores 907 and the Radeon R5 340 reaches 935 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GT 640M is built on Kepler while the Radeon R5 340 uses GCN 4.0, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GT 640M) vs 384 (Radeon R5 340). Raw compute: 0.48 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 640M) vs 0.9085 TFLOPS (Radeon R5 340). Boost clocks: 645 MHz vs 1124 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GT 640M	Radeon R5 340
G3D Mark Score	907	935+3%
Architecture	Kepler	GCN 4.0
Process Node	28 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	384	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.48 TFLOPS	0.9085 TFLOPS+89%
Boost Clock	645 MHz	1124 MHz+74%
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	32+33%	24
L1 Cache	32 KB	96 KB+200%
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GT 640M gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon R5 340 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce GT 640M	Radeon R5 340
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GT 640M has 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R5 340 carries 512 MB. GeForce GT 640M gives you 300% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GT 640M and 128-bit on the Radeon R5 340. L2 Cache: 256 KB (GeForce GT 640M) vs 512 KB (Radeon R5 340) — the Radeon R5 340 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GT 640M	Radeon R5 340
VRAM Capacity	2 GB+300%	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GT 640M draws 32W versus the Radeon R5 340's 50W — a 43.9% difference. The GeForce GT 640M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GT 640M) vs 300W (Radeon R5 340). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None.

Feature	GeForce GT 640M	Radeon R5 340
TDP	32W-36%	50W
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	None
Length	0mm	—
Height	0mm	—
Slots	0	—
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	28.3+51%	18.7

💰

Value Analysis

The newer card here is Radeon R5 340 (2017 vs 2012).

Feature	GeForce GT 640M	Radeon R5 340
MSRP	—	$99
Codename	GK107	Lexa
Release	March 22 2012	April 20 2017
Ranking	#909	#773

Search GeForce GT 640M on Amazon

Search Radeon R5 340 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.