Monday, July 16th 2012

Point of View Launches the GeForce GT 640 TGT Ultra Charged Graphics Card

Point of View the leading European manufacturer of an exclusive range NVIDIA based 3D processor boards, advanced netbooks as well as fancy 7” and 10” Tegra tablet computers and additional enthusiast PC products, announces today the POV/TGT GeForce GT 640 Ultra Charged 3D processor board running at 1006 MHz. The POV/TGT GeForce GT 640 Ultra Charged is the first GT 640 board on the market significantly overclocking both, the core clock (1006 MHz vs. 901 MHz) and the memory clock.

The POV/TGT GeForce GT 640 Ultra Charged features an enhanced design to also boost the memory clock from the 1782 MHz reference setting to 2020 MHz. The POV/TGT GeForce GT 640 Ultra Charged is immediately available at an expected street price of around € 115 incl. VAT.
Add your own comment

11 Comments on Point of View Launches the GeForce GT 640 TGT Ultra Charged Graphics Card

#1
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Many Thanks to NHKS for the tip.
Posted on Reply
#3
_JP_
lol
For that price, what's keeping me from buying an HD 7770 that would completely run over this card...?
nVidia/PoV, get real...
Posted on Reply
#4
Dj-ElectriC
What a fu*king waste of good money...
Posted on Reply
#5
Casecutter
Yep, this wrong on so many levels. These things wheren't great power/Perf; this just makes that worse. I still can't for the life of me understand why Nvidia went DDR3, wouldn’t DDR5 not help? Or is it that DDR5 doesn't help all that much, especially verses to add cost, which they are already way to greedy. (And guy bitched about AMD being overprice on 28Nm?) These need a $70 MSRP and then on a half-height board, without that old VGA and it could have a place in the HTPC, but like this it's nothing to nobody.
Posted on Reply
#6
Spectrobozo
by: Casecutter
Yep, this wrong on so many levels. These things wheren't great power/Perf; this just makes that worse. I still can't for the life of me understand why Nvidia went DDR3, wouldn’t DDR5 not help? Or is it that DDR5 doesn't help all that much, especially verses to add cost, which they are already way to greedy. (And guy bitched about AMD being overprice on 28Nm?) These need a $70 MSRP and then on a half-height board, without that old VGA and it could have a place in the HTPC, but like this it's nothing to nobody.
maybe they are just not ready to "kill" gf106/116 cards yet, plenty of stocks of GTS 450/GTX 550 Ti...

DDR5 helps quite a lot for this cards, try to find a DDR3 GTS 450 or HD5700 review and you will see...
Posted on Reply
#7
DarkOCean
by: Spectrobozo
maybe they are just not ready to "kill" gf106/116 cards yet, plenty of stocks of GTS 450/GTX 550 Ti...

DDR5 helps quite a lot for this cards, try to find a DDR3 GTS 450 or HD5700 review and you will see...
there's no 5700 series with ddr3 maybe you meant 5500 series .
There was a review on a forum on the gddr5 version of gt 640 i think it was a mobile part and even that one was still weaker than a 7750.
Posted on Reply
#8
Casecutter
by: Spectrobozo
maybe they are just not ready to "kill" gf106/116 cards yet, plenty of stocks of GTS 450/GTX 550 Ti...

DDR5 helps quite a lot for this cards, try to find a DDR3 GTS 450 or HD5700 review and you will see...
:wtf: Their waiting, so you agree this is a waste and everyone should wait till Nvidia wakes-up?

I recall one or two AIB’s equipping GTS 450’s with 2GB of DDR3, but even still the GTS450 was so bad it hardly was competition for the 5750 (which I don't recall offer DDR3), and Nvidia showed with a GTS450 like 11 months later? The GT440 wasn’t as good as the GT240DDR5, which was like the last great low-end Nvidia has offered.

This card is like those 9600 that Nvidia dump with 128-Bit and 48 shaders; those got the nicknamed - POS! :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#9
Elmo
i guess competition is hard for the low segment gpus since there are apus intel hd graphics getting better. Its either they discontinue the low end or improve the low end :s
Posted on Reply
#11
Spectrobozo
by: DarkOCean
there's no 5700 series with ddr3 maybe you meant 5500 series .
There was a review on a forum on the gddr5 version of gt 640 i think it was a mobile part and even that one was still weaker than a 7750.
I've seen a good number of 5750 (6750) with slow DDR3 on the market, originally the card had DDR5 at 4600MHz (1150), but I found cards (juniper le, 720sps) with DDR3 at 1600MHz :laugh:

HIS H675FS1G Radeon HD 6750 1GB 128-bit DDR3 PCI E...

not as bad as a GTS 450 with 64bit 1000MHz (500) ram I've seen.


keep in mind that the mobile GK107 with DDR5 is clocked lower than a desktop part (and normally with slower CPUs), and even so the results look close to a 7750

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Asus-G55VW-S1020V-Notebook.74851.0.html

by: Casecutter
:wtf: Their waiting, so you agree this is a waste and everyone should wait till Nvidia wakes-up?

I recall one or two AIB’s equipping GTS 450’s with 2GB of DDR3, but even still the GTS450 was so bad it hardly was competition for the 5750 (which I don't recall offer DDR3), and Nvidia showed with a GTS450 like 11 months later? The GT440 wasn’t as good as the GT240DDR5, which was like the last great low-end Nvidia has offered.

This card is like those 9600 that Nvidia dump with 128-Bit and 48 shaders; those got the nicknamed - POS! :laugh:
the GTS 450 DDR5 was decent against the 5750, again, originally there was no DDR3 version, but later many were released...
but yes, it was different from what's going on with the GK107, the reference GTS 450 was decent, and later partners released slower/cheaper cards with slow memory,
for GK107 it seems nvidia is dictating the use of DDR3 (like they did with the GT 430 and later released the GT 440 with DDR5 as an option and higher clocks? but I think that GPU was to slow compared to the GK107 to be so limited by memory bandwidth), so the only reason I can see is to give some space to sell old cards (GTS 450, GTX 550 Ti, GTX 460) to later allow the use of DDR5, AND maybe it's selling so well on the mobiles (with higher price and profit) that they don't want a huge volume on the desktops as a $100 card yet (if it was faster, using DDR5 demand would be higher, but they couldn't really ask for much more than $100 since there are so many options at this price range)?... but that's just a guess.

gf108 looked to slow in some aspects (4ROPs?), but if you look at the GT 240, it wasn't always faster than the 9600GT either,

anyway, I would never recommend buying the GT 640, but a DDR5 card with the GK107 will probably work well (IF they don't price it as badly as the GT 640)
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment