Trending

Nvidia Preps OEM GeForce GT 630, GT 645 & Three GT 640s

By

Nvidia has released its first desktop graphics cards based on its new 28 nm Kepler GK107 silicon for OEMs, along with a few Fermi-based GPUs.

Nvidia has released five new GeForce cards under the 600 series, which are designated for OEMs only. There still is no official word from Nvidia on when the Kepler-based GK107 cards are expected for the desktop (though we should expect them here in the near future).

The top card, the GeForce GT 645, is a re-branding of the recently released Fermi-based GF114 GeForce GTX 560 SE. The other Fermi-based card is one of three GeForce GT 640 cards. It is based on the Fermi GF116, which features 144 CUDA cores, 1.5 GB or 3 GB GDDR3 192-bit memory interface, 720 MHz core clock speed, and 891 MHz memory clock speed.

There are three Kepler-based GK107 graphics cards, which all feature 384 CUDA cores, 24 TMUs and 16 ROPs. The two GeForce GT 640s differ in core clocks, memory, and TDP. At the high-end, the GT 640 has a core clock speed of 950 MHz, with the low-end running at 797 MHz. The memory clocks come in at 2500 MHz (GDDR5) and 891 MHz (GDDR3) respectively. The cards offer TDP of 75 W and 50 W.

One of the more interesting cards of the bunch is the GeForce GT 630. It is a single-slot, low-profile graphics card with 384 CUDA cores, 128-bit wide GDDR3 memory interface, 875 MHz GPU clock speed, 891 MHz memory clock speed and TDP of 50 W. When compared against the low-end GT 640, the GT 630 is actually the better card and in-turn will offer users better performance in their OEM system.  

Specifications:

GeForce GT 630GeForce GT 640GeForce GT 640GeForce GT 640GeForce GT 645
ArchitectureKepler GK107Kepler GK107Fermi GF116Kepler GK107Fermi GF114
CUDA Cores:384384144384288
Core Clock:875 MHz797 MHz720 MHz950 MHz776 MHz
Shaders Clock:875 MHz797 MHz1440 MHz950 MHz1552 MHz
Memory Clock:891 MHz891 MHz891 MHz2500 MHz1914 MHz
Memory Type:1 or 2GB GDDR3 128-bit1 or 2GB GDDR3 128-bit1.5 or 3GB GDDR3 192-bit1 or 2GB GDDR5 128-bit1GB GDDR5 128-bit
Memory Bandwidth28.5 GB/s28.4 GB/s43 GB/s80 GB/s91.9 GB/s
Open GL:4.24.24.24.24.2
PCI-Express:33332
DirectX:1111111111
TDP:50 W50 W75 W75 W140 W
GeForce GT 630GeForce GT 640GeForce GT 645
Image Credit: VideoCardz
32 Comments Comment from the forums
  • alvine 26 April 2012 21:07
    Nvidia I like you but please stop re-branding cards you are basically lying to noobs buying their dells,hps thinking they are getting the latest and greatest
    Reply
  • drwho1 26 April 2012 21:24
    New?
    We all know they are the same old dog in a new bun with some new ketchup on top.
    Reply
  • americanbrian 26 April 2012 21:25
    so, the GT 630 is actually very much better than the low end GT 640?, of which there is a huge performance spread under a single model number?

    Is that even legal? How would even their corporate customers know what they are getting if the model number is all the same? I suppose with cars the same is true, there are various sub-types all with different specs. But it certainly breaks the mould, and the trust that clients have in Nvidia.
    Reply
  • schnitter 26 April 2012 21:30
    680 GTX might be better than AMD 7970 but at least AMD don't rebrand everything so I rather lose the small performance than support a company that rebrands their cards and forces PhysX on us which hamper games evolution.
    Reply
  • Wisecracker 26 April 2012 21:47
    The thing is, especially with OEMs, the threshold of entry-level discreet has made quite a leap, and will jump even higher with Trinity. If the reports of enhancements to dual-graphics are accurate it will make even less sense.

    AND, if the rumors concerning TrinityII are accurate, HD7750s / 550TIs days are numbered.

    If someone checks, I think they will find AMD plans to re-brand low-end 6000 series to 7's so nVidia understandably sees the writing on wall.

    Reply
  • -Jackson 26 April 2012 21:47
    gemma527How would even their corporate customers know what they are getting if the model number is all the same?Exactly, noobs that don't do their research will suffer from this.
    Reply
  • outlw6669 26 April 2012 21:49
    So, the GT 630 is more powerful than 2/3 GT 640 cards (of which there are three of...) and is also probably faster than the GT 645 :/
    Way to to confusing your customers nVidia.
    Reply
  • alphaalphaalpha 26 April 2012 21:59
    schnitter680 GTX might be better than AMD 7970 but at least AMD don't rebrand everything so I rather lose the small performance than support a company that rebrands their cards and forces PhysX on us which hamper games evolution.
    Nvidia doesn't force PhysX on anyone (in fact, most games don't even support it and the Kepler cards aren't even as good at it as the Fermi cards, so it seems that Nvidia is stepping back on PhysX). Furthermore, PhysX does not hamper game evolution. Also, AMD re-badges and reuses older cards and architectures too.

    Radeon 5750 was re-badged to Radeon 6750 and 5770 to 6770.
    All Radeon 6000 cards that weren't re-badges or weren't Radeon 6900 cards used the same VLIW5 architecture as the Radeon 5000 cards even if they weren't exactly re-badges.

    Many of the "new" Radeon 7000 cards will reuse the same VLIW5 architecture that has been in use fore two generations prior to the Radeon 7000 cards. For example, all mobile and desktop Radeon 7600 and below cards will use the VLIW5 architecture, so although they might not be re-badges, they will at the very least be using a several years old architecture.

    So, both Nvidia and AMD will be reusing their first DX11 architectures, Fermi and VLIW5, for their low end cards two generations later. Both Nvidia and AMD have been doing this for a while now. It is nothing new for either company.
    Reply
  • digiex 26 April 2012 22:22
    They should at least named it GT640.1, GT640.2, GT640.3.
    Reply
  • matt_b 26 April 2012 22:46
    alphaalphaalphaNvidia doesn't force PhysX on anyone (in fact, most games don't even support it and the Kepler cards aren't even as good at it as the Fermi cards, so it seems that Nvidia is stepping back on PhysX). Furthermore, PhysX does not hamper game evolution. Also, AMD re-badges and reuses older cards and architectures too.Radeon 5750 was re-badged to Radeon 6750 and 5770 to 6770.All Radeon 6000 cards that weren't re-badges or weren't Radeon 6900 cards used the same VLIW5 architecture as the Radeon 5000 cards even if they weren't exactly re-badges.Many of the "new" Radeon 7000 cards will reuse the same VLIW5 architecture that has been in use fore two generations prior to the Radeon 7000 cards. For example, all mobile and desktop Radeon 7600 and below cards will use the VLIW5 architecture, so although they might not be re-badges, they will at the very least be using a several years old architecture.So, both Nvidia and AMD will be reusing their first DX11 architectures, Fermi and VLIW5, for their low end cards two generations later. Both Nvidia and AMD have been doing this for a while now. It is nothing new for either company.I completely agree with the first paragraph, Nvidia pulled a lot of the muscle out of the new cards to favor FPS over compute power (which PhysX is one of the victims as you named). However, I have no problem if the same architecture is used for a new generation of cards, just don't make it the same exact part with no modifications or tweaks and call it new and improved with no change except for the name.
    Reply