NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 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, GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 240
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- Around 8% higher core clock speed: 1340 MHz vs 1242 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 40 nm vs 65 nm
- 2.6x lower typical power consumption: 69 Watt vs 182 Watt
- Around 14% higher maximum memory size: 512 MB or 1 GB vs 896 MB
- Around 70% higher memory clock speed: 1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz vs 999 MHz
| Launch date | 17 November 2009 vs 16 June 2008 |
| Core clock speed | 1340 MHz vs 1242 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm vs 65 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 69 Watt vs 182 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 512 MB or 1 GB vs 896 MB |
| Memory clock speed | 1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz vs 999 MHz |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260
- 2.1x more texture fill rate: 36.9 billion / sec vs 17.6 GTexel / s
- 2x more pipelines: 192 vs 96
- Around 85% better floating-point performance: 476.9 gflops vs 257.28 gflops
- 2.4x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1224 vs 510
- Around 13% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 59 vs 52
- 2.1x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 19512 vs 9236
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3342 vs 1385
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3342 vs 1385
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 36.9 billion / sec vs 17.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 192 vs 96 |
| Floating-point performance | 476.9 gflops vs 257.28 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1224 vs 510 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 59 vs 52 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 19512 vs 9236 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3342 vs 1385 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3342 vs 1385 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 240
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 510 | 1224 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 52 | 59 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9236 | 19512 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1979 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1979 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1385 | 3342 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1385 | 3342 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.664 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 477.327 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.906 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 29.525 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | GT215 | GT200 |
| Launch date | 17 November 2009 | 16 June 2008 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | $449 |
| Place in performance rating | 1386 | 1387 |
| Price now | $37.99 | $95.38 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 22.27 | 13.70 |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 1340 MHz | 1242 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 96 | 192 |
| Floating-point performance | 257.28 gflops | 476.9 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 65 nm |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105C C | 105 °C |
| Pipelines | 96 | 192 |
| Texture fill rate | 17.6 GTexel / s | 36.9 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 69 Watt | 182 Watt |
| Transistor count | 727 million | 1,400 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | S / PDIF |
| Display Connectors | DVIVGAHDMI, 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video, Dual Link DVIHDTV |
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | 2048x1536 |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 6.6" (168mm) (16.8 cm) | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 2x 6-pin |
| SLI options | 2-way3-way | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 10.1 | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.2 | 2.1 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB or 1 GB | 896 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 54.4 GB / s | 111.9 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 448 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz | 999 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 with others
NVIDIAGeForce GT 240 vs
ATIRadeon HD 3870
NVIDIAGeForce GT 240 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9600 GSO
NVIDIAGeForce GT 240 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 260
NVIDIAGeForce GT 240 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 5750
NVIDIAGeForce GT 240 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 330 OEM
NVIDIAGeForce GT 240 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 415M
