FireStream 9270 vs GeForce GT 640M
In this comparison between FireStream 9270 and GeForce GT 640M you will find out which graphics card performs better in today's games. Bear in mind that third-party versions may have more efficient cooling and higher clock speeds. This will increase cards' performance, though not by much. In addition to raw power you should also take into account the dimensions. Thicker models simply will not fit into a small mini-ITX case. The resolution of your monitor also affects the choice, since 4K gameplay requires a more powerful GPU. And don't overspend on the graphics card. Other parts of your build may also need to be upgraded, save some money for the CPU or power supply. For some people FireStream 9270 will be the best choice, for others GeForce GT 640M will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
FireStream 9270
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 9270 | GeForce GT 640M | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 160 Watt | 32 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3\GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI | No outputs |
| Check Price |
- FireStream 9270 has 400% more power consumption, than GeForce GT 640M.
- FireStream 9270 is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and GeForce GT 640M uses PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.
- FireStream 9270 and GeForce GT 640M have maximum RAM of 2 GB.
- FireStream 9270 is used in Desktops, and GeForce GT 640M - in Laptops.
- FireStream 9270 is build with TeraScale architecture, and GeForce GT 640M - with Kepler.
- FireStream 9270 is manufactured by 55 nm process technology, and GeForce GT 640M - by 28 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of FireStream 9270 is 1800 MHz higher, than GeForce GT 640M.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| QHD / 1440p | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 10−12 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 2−3 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 83% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 3−4 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 12−14 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−12 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in Battlefield 5 is 100% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 40−45 | 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 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 100−110 | 85−90 |
| ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 35−40 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 12−14 | 10−11 |
| high / 768p | 75−80 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 24% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 70−75 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 12−14 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GT 640M in Cyberpunk 2077 is 12% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 80−85 | 70−75 |
| medium / 768p | 55−60 | 40−45 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in Dota 2 is 29% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 2−3 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 2−3 |
| 4K / 2160p | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 9−10 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in Far Cry 5 is 125% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 5−6 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 55−60 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in Fortnite is 40% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | 2−3 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 8−9 | − |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 5−6 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in Forza Horizon 4 is 114% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 40−45 |
| high / 1080p | 10−12 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 2−3 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | 45−50 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in Grand Theft Auto V is 45% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 1−2 |
| ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 10−11 | 2−3 |
| medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 2−3 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in Metro Exodus is 200% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | − | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in Minecraft is 5% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | − |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 24−27 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−11 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GT 640M in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 41% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | − | 3−4 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 10−11 | 3−4 |
| medium / 1080p | 9−10 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 233% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 21−24 | 7−8 |
| medium / 768p | 14−16 | 6−7 |
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 180% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
| low / 768p | 75−80 | 70−75 |
| medium / 768p | 40−45 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 12−14 |
| high / 768p | 30−35 | 27−30 |
| The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9270 in World of Tanks is 13% more, than GeForce GT 640M. | ||
Full Specs
| FireStream 9270 | GeForce GT 640M | |
| Architecture | TeraScale | Kepler |
| Code name | RV770 | N13P-GS |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 13 November 2008 | 22 March 2012 |
| Pipelines | 800 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 750 MHz | |
| Boost Clock | 645 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 956 million | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 30.00 | |
| Floating-point performance | 1,200.0 gflops | 480.0 gflops |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128bit |
| Memory clock speed | 3600 MHz | 1800 - 4000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 115.2 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 |