AMD Radeon R7 240 vs AMD Radeon HD 6510
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R7 240 and AMD Radeon HD 6510 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 R7 240
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 4 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
- Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2342 vs 1970
- Around 31% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 vs 2551
- Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2342 vs 1970
- Around 31% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 vs 2551
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 8 October 2013 vs 14 May 2011 |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1 GB |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2342 vs 1970 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 vs 2551 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2342 vs 1970 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 vs 2551 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 6510
- Around 50% higher pipelines: 480 vs 320
- Around 25% better floating-point performance: 624.0 gflops vs 499.2 gflops
- Around 28% lower typical power consumption: 39 Watt vs 50 Watt
- Around 16% higher memory clock speed: 1334 MHz vs 1150 MHz
- Around 49% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 7845 vs 5251
Specifications (specs) | |
Pipelines | 480 vs 320 |
Floating-point performance | 624.0 gflops vs 499.2 gflops |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 39 Watt vs 50 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 1334 MHz vs 1150 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 7845 vs 5251 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 240
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6510
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon R7 240 | AMD Radeon HD 6510 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 898 | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 272 | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5251 | 7845 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 13.344 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 290.632 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.262 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.59 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 60.326 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1688 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2342 | 1970 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 2551 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1688 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2342 | 1970 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 2551 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon R7 240 | AMD Radeon HD 6510 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | TeraScale 2 |
Code name | Oland | Turks |
Design | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
Launch date | 8 October 2013 | 14 May 2011 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $69 | |
Place in performance rating | 1245 | 1248 |
Price now | $49.99 | |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Value for money (0-100) | 24.92 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 780 MHz | |
Floating-point performance | 499.2 gflops | 624.0 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 320 | 480 |
Stream Processors | 320 | |
Texture fill rate | 15.6 GTexel / s | 15.6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 39 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,040 million | 716 million |
Core clock speed | 650 MHz | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | 168 mm | 165 mm |
Supplementary power connectors | N / A | None |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 11.2 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 72 GB/s | 16 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1150 MHz | 1334 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR3 |
Technologies |
||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync |