GeForce GT 240 vs GT 1030

Place in the ranking	575	1028
Place by popularity	37	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.31	0.01
Power efficiency	14.77	1.32
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	GP108	GT215
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	17 May 2017 (7 years ago)	17 November 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$79	$80

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 1030 has 23000% better value for money than GT 240.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	384	96
Core clock speed	1228 MHz	550 MHz
Boost clock speed	1468 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,800 million	727 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	69 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105C C
Texture fill rate	35.23	17.60
Floating-point processing power	1.127 TFLOPS	0.2573 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	24	32

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x4	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	145 mm	168 mm
Height	no data	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB or 1 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz
Memory bandwidth	48.06 GB/s	54.4 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI	DVIVGAHDMI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
G-SYNC support	+	-
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Ready

no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	6.4	4.1
OpenGL	4.6	3.2
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
CUDA	6.1	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GT 1030 6.37
+386%

GT 240 1.31

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GT 1030 2456
+385%

GT 240 506

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 1030 20192
+287%

GT 240 5221

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	24 −4.2%	25 +4.2%
1440p	23 +475%	4−5 −475%
4K	8 +700%	1−2 −700%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.29	3.20
1440p	3.43	20.00
4K	9.88	80.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

15
+275%

4−5

−275%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18 +200%	6−7 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Battlefield 5	22 +450%	4−5 −450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18 +350%	4−5 −350%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +175%	4−5 −175%
Far Cry 5	21 +2000%	1−2 −2000%
Far Cry New Dawn	27 +800%	3−4 −800%
Forza Horizon 4	93 +4550%	2−3 −4550%
Hitman 3	16 +167%	6−7 −167%
Horizon Zero Dawn	152 +986%	14−16 −986%
Metro Exodus	26 +420%	5−6 −420%
Red Dead Redemption 2	31 +1450%	2−3 −1450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	37 +363%	8−9 −363%
Watch Dogs: Legion	93 +182%	30−35 −182%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24 +300%	6−7 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Battlefield 5	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16 +300%	4−5 −300%
Cyberpunk 2077	7 +75%	4−5 −75%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Far Cry New Dawn	20 +567%	3−4 −567%
Forza Horizon 4	84 +4100%	2−3 −4100%
Hitman 3	15 +150%	6−7 −150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	123 +779%	14−16 −779%
Metro Exodus	20 +400%	4−5 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	15 +650%	2−3 −650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	19 +138%	8−9 −138%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 +81.8%	10−12 −81.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	84 +155%	30−35 −155%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5 +25%	4−5 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Forza Horizon 4	16 +700%	2−3 −700%
Hitman 3	12−14 +117%	6−7 −117%
Horizon Zero Dawn	19 +35.7%	14−16 −35.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16 +100%	8−9 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12 +9.1%	10−12 −9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	6 −450%	30−35 +450%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

19
+850%

2−3

−850%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +400%	4−5 −400%
Hitman 3	10−11 +42.9%	7−8 −42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14 +180%	5−6 −180%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	11 +450%	2−3 −450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	48 +700%	6−7 −700%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12
+175%

4−5

−175%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Far Cry New Dawn	4	0−1
Hitman 3	3−4	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
Metro Exodus	3−4	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1 +0%	1−2 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	7 +600%	1−2 −600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6 +500%	1−2 −500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+133%

3−4

−133%

This is how GT 1030 and GT 240 compete in popular games:

GT 240 is 4% faster in 1080p
GT 1030 is 475% faster in 1440p
GT 1030 is 700% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 1030 is 4550% faster.
in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 240 is 450% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GT 1030 is ahead in 46 tests (96%)
GT 240 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.37	1.31
Recency	17 May 2017	17 November 2009
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB or 1 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	69 Watt

GT 1030 has a 386.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 130% lower power consumption.

GT 240, on the other hand, has a 12700% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The GeForce GT 1030 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.