NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 240
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M and NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 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 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 9 month(s) later
- 5.8x lower typical power consumption: 12 Watt vs 69 Watt
- 4.6x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 221 vs 48
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1570 vs 1385
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1570 vs 1385
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 3 September 2010 vs 17 November 2009 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 12 Watt vs 69 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 221 vs 48 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1570 vs 1385 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1570 vs 1385 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 240
- Around 34% higher core clock speed: 1340 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- 5.9x more texture fill rate: 17.6 GTexel / s vs 3.0 billion / sec
- 2x more pipelines: 96 vs 48
- 2.7x better floating-point performance: 257.28 gflops vs 96 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 512 MB or 1 GB vs 512 MB
- 2.1x more memory clock speed: 1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz vs 800 MHz
- Around 76% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 504 vs 286
- 12.3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9236 vs 751
- Around 71% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1979 vs 1158
- Around 71% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1979 vs 1158
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1340 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 17.6 GTexel / s vs 3.0 billion / sec |
Pipelines | 96 vs 48 |
Floating-point performance | 257.28 gflops vs 96 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 512 MB or 1 GB vs 512 MB |
Memory clock speed | 1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz vs 800 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 504 vs 286 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9236 vs 751 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1979 vs 1158 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1979 vs 1158 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 240
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) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 286 | 504 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 221 | 48 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 751 | 9236 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 442 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 442 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1158 | 1979 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1158 | 1979 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1570 | 1385 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1570 | 1385 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Fermi | Tesla 2.0 |
Code name | GF108 | GT215 |
Launch date | 3 September 2010 | 17 November 2009 |
Place in performance rating | 1388 | 1390 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | |
Price now | $37.99 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 22.27 | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1340 MHz |
CUDA cores | 48 | 96 |
Floating-point performance | 96 gflops | 257.28 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 48 | 96 |
Texture fill rate | 3.0 billion / sec | 17.6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 12 Watt | 69 Watt |
Transistor count | 585 million | 727 million |
Maximum GPU temperature | 105C C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | DVIVGAHDMI, 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
HDMI | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | |
Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
Length | 6.6" (168mm) (16.8 cm) | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 10.1 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.2 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 512 MB or 1 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB / s | 54.4 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz |
Memory type | (G)DDR3 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
CUDA | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Optimus | ||
3D Vision |