AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM vs AMD Radeon R9 270X
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM and AMD Radeon R9 270X videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM
- 3.6x lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 180 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt vs 180 Watt |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 270X
- Around 35% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 780 MHz
- 5.4x more texture fill rate: 84 GTexel / s vs 15.6 GTexel / s
- 4x more pipelines: 1280 vs 320
- 5.4x better floating-point performance: 2,688 gflops vs 499.2 gflops
- 8.9x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4869 vs 548
- 3.2x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 613 vs 194
- 4.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 63.87 vs 13.569
- 8.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1314.72 vs 162.886
- 6.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.354 vs 1.009
- 4.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 85.21 vs 19.668
- 4.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 315.412 vs 77.819
- 7.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8068 vs 1119
- 2.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3706 vs 1284
- Around 48% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3350 vs 2264
- 7.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8068 vs 1119
- 2.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3706 vs 1284
- Around 48% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3350 vs 2264
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz vs 780 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 84 GTexel / s vs 15.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1280 vs 320 |
| Floating-point performance | 2,688 gflops vs 499.2 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4869 vs 548 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 613 vs 194 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 63.87 vs 13.569 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1314.72 vs 162.886 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.354 vs 1.009 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 85.21 vs 19.668 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 315.412 vs 77.819 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8068 vs 1119 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3706 vs 1284 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 vs 2264 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8068 vs 1119 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3706 vs 1284 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 vs 2264 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 270X
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM | AMD Radeon R9 270X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 548 | 4869 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 194 | 613 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4936 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 13.569 | 63.87 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 162.886 | 1314.72 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.009 | 6.354 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.668 | 85.21 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 77.819 | 315.412 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1119 | 8068 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1284 | 3706 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2264 | 3350 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1119 | 8068 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1284 | 3706 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2264 | 3350 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1772 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM | AMD Radeon R9 270X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | Oland | Curacao |
| Launch date | 1 November 2013 | 8 October 2013 |
| Place in performance rating | 1406 | 440 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | |
| Price now | $399 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 16.05 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 780 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 730 MHz | |
| Floating-point performance | 499.2 gflops | 2,688 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 320 | 1280 |
| Texture fill rate | 15.6 GTexel / s | 84 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 180 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,040 million | 2,800 million |
| Stream Processors | 1280 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| Dual-link DVI support | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 168 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 2 x 6-pin |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.8 GB / s | 179.2 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | |
| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM with others
AMDRadeon R5 240 OEM vs
NVIDIAQuadro K1000M
AMDRadeon R5 240 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 625 OEM
AMDRadeon R5 240 OEM vs
AMDRadeon HD 8550G
AMDRadeon R5 240 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce 710A
AMDRadeon R5 240 OEM vs
AMDRadeon R7 M265
AMDRadeon R5 240 OEM vs
AMDRadeon R6 Graphics
