Nvidia GeForce GT 640 Review: Cramming Kepler Into GK107

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
It gets worse, Nvidia will also release lower less efficient models like GT630 and GT610 omg...AMD is rocking with the new HD 7750 and HD 7770
 
Don Woligroski, i think you have to update this review...Saying "GeForce GT 640 gives Nvidia a potentially potent budget contender", makes everybody believe you are really favoring Nvidia no matter what...maybe they are giving you some cash behind the table?? 😀
 


i see some fanboyism but i do get the idea. nvidia isnt aiming at low end anytime soon
 
[citation][nom]Kenshin55[/nom]WOW this GT 640 is like the worst GPU ever and cost around $110...An old $65 Radeon HD 6570 is a lot better, correction my old cellphone is even better than this GT640[/citation]

The 6570 is a significantly inferior graphics card to the GT 640 DDR3. I doubt that even the 6570 GDDR5 would come very close. The GT 640 GDDR5 is substantially faster than the GT 640 DDR3, so just saying the GT 640 is not helping your case either.
 
[citation][nom]Kenshin55[/nom]Don Woligroski, i think you have to update this review...Saying "GeForce GT 640 gives Nvidia a potentially potent budget contender", makes everybody believe you are really favoring Nvidia no matter what...maybe they are giving you some cash behind the table??[/citation]

You're ridiculous.

I also said:

"This segment is riddled with strong competitors, (particularly the Radeon HD 7750, which blows GeForce GT 640 out of the water and sells for as low as $110). Of course, many budget-minded offerings start out in this price range and drop soon after release: the Radeon HD 5670, 6670 GDDR5, and GeForce GT 240 all landed in our lab accompanied by $100 price targets. The real question is whether or not Nvidia is willing to get scrappy on pricing..."

Are you suggesting that Nvidia paid me to say the Radeon HD 7750 blows it out of the water, too? 😀

Take it in context and stop embarrassing yourself with shameless fanboyism.
 
[citation][nom]yogeshm007[/nom]What about GTX550Ti? Its selling at a similar price to 7750 at my place.[/citation]

The two are fairly similar in performance, but the GTX 550 TI probably uses between two and three times more electricity than the Radeon 7750.
 
[citation][nom]yogeshm007[/nom]What about GTX550Ti? Its selling at a similar price to 7750 at my place.[/citation]

The 7750 is notably faster than the 550 Ti from what I've seen.
 
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]Are you referring to the 800MHz 7750 or the 900MHz 7750?[/citation]

Even the 800 MHz card. It's more inconsistent, but I'd say it performs closer to the GTS 450, which is superior to the 550 Ti. And AMD's drivers have gotten better since the 7750 release, too.
 
ATI MSI R6670 1gb GDDR5, Avg. 47 frames, Min 41, DX9 1600 by 900 All on High Motion Blur on high.
Do not know where your frames come from but thats horrible...
On 1280 by 800 it never drops bellow 60 frames.
I have done a overclock 800 mhz to 900 mhz and 1000mzh to 1100mhz but before that played on Very high and got 42 avg and 32 min.
Need to recheck your frames gentz.
 
[citation][nom]ash_73[/nom]ATI MSI R6670 1gb GDDR5, Avg. 47 frames, Min 41, DX9 1600 by 900 All on High Motion Blur on high.Do not know where your frames come from but thats horrible...On 1280 by 800 it never drops bellow 60 frames.I have done a overclock 800 mhz to 900 mhz and 1000mzh to 1100mhz but before that played on Very high and got 42 avg and 32 min.Need to recheck your frames gentz.[/citation]

Are you running the same games in the same settings as these tests done by Tom's in this article? Also, are they the exact same version as the games tested in benchmarks done by Tom's in this article? You don't specify any of this and more, so probably not.
 
AMD HD 6770 of 1GDDR5 is about $89, AMD HD 7750 is around $100-110...Although i love Nvidia, in this segment AMD is the clear winner...GeForce GT520 and GT640 keep being almost the worst choice in a price/performance relation in history
 
Status
Not open for further replies.