FireStream 9250 vs GeForce GT 640M
Find out if it is worth upgrading your current GPU setup by comparing FireStream 9250 and GeForce GT 640M. Here you can take a closer look at graphics cards specs, such as core clock speed, memory type and size, display connectors, etc. The price, overall benchmark and gaming performances are usually defining factors when it comes to choosing between FireStream 9250 and GeForce GT 640M. Make sure that the graphics card has compatible dimensions and will properly fit in your new or current computer case. Also these graphics cards may have different system power recommendations, so take that into consideration and upgrade your PSU if necessary.
FireStream 9250
GeForce GT 640M is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: GeForce GT 640M is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with GeForce GT 640M here:
Main Specs
| FireStream 9250 | GeForce GT 640M | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 32 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR3 | DDR3\GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI | No outputs |
| Check Price |
- FireStream 9250 has 368% more power consumption, than GeForce GT 640M.
- FireStream 9250 is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and GeForce GT 640M uses PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.
- GeForce GT 640M has 1 GB more memory, than FireStream 9250.
- FireStream 9250 is used in Desktops, and GeForce GT 640M - in Laptops.
- FireStream 9250 is build with TeraScale architecture, and GeForce GT 640M - with Kepler.
- FireStream 9250 is manufactured by 55 nm process technology, and GeForce GT 640M - by 28 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of FireStream 9250 is 186 MHz higher, than GeForce GT 640M.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 10−12 |
| medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 2−3 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 50% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 3−4 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 12−14 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in Battlefield 5 is 42% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 35−40 | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GT 640M in Call of Duty: Warzone is 11% more, than FireStream 9250. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 95−100 | 85−90 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 35−40 |
| QHD / 1440p | 35−40 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 18−20 | 10−11 |
| high / 768p | 70−75 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 18% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 80−85 | 70−75 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 12−14 |
| medium / 1080p | 50−55 | 45−50 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 15% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 75−80 | 70−75 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 40−45 |
| ultra / 1080p | 27−30 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in Dota 2 is 18% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 2−3 |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | 2−3 |
| 4K / 2160p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 9−10 |
| medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in Far Cry 5 is 50% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−12 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | 5−6 |
| QHD / 1440p | 3−4 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 50−55 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in Fortnite is 26% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 8−9 | 2−3 |
| ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 20−22 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−11 | 5−6 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in Forza Horizon 4 is 85% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 40−45 |
| high / 1080p | 8−9 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | 2−3 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | 40−45 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in Grand Theft Auto V is 30% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | 1−2 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 7−8 | 2−3 |
| medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 2−3 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in Metro Exodus is 100% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | 85−90 | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | 85−90 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 75−80 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in Minecraft is 20% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 24−27 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| FireStream 9250 and GeForce GT 640M have the same average FPS in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS. | ||
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 3−4 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | − |
| low / 720p | 7−8 | 3−4 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 100% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 16−18 | 7−8 |
| medium / 768p | 12−14 | 6−7 |
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 140% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 80−85 | 70−75 |
| medium / 768p | 40−45 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
| high / 768p | 30−35 | 27−30 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9250 in World of Tanks is 16% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
Full Specs
| FireStream 9250 | GeForce GT 640M | |
| Architecture | TeraScale | Kepler |
| Code name | RV770 | N13P-GS |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 16 June 2008 | 22 March 2012 |
| Pipelines | 800 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 625 MHz | |
| Boost Clock | 645 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 956 million | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 25.00 | |
| Floating-point performance | 1,000.0 gflops | 480.0 gflops |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1986 MHz | 1800 - 4000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 63.55 GB/s | |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12 API |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | + | |
| CUDA cores | 384 | |
| Bus support | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | |
| HDMI | + | |
| HDCP | + | |
| Maximum VGA resolution | Up to 2048x1536 | |
| 3D Blu-Ray | + | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 18 Mh/s | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Optimus | + | |
| Check Price |