Arc A380 vs GeForce GT 240

Place in performance ranking	1032	333
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	43.84
Architecture	GT2xx (2009−2012)	Xe HPG (2022−2023)
GPU code name	GT215	DG2-128
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	17 November 2009 (14 years ago)	14 June 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$80	$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Arc A380 has 438300% better value for money than GT 240.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	96	1024
CUDA cores	96	no data
Core clock speed	550 MHz	2000 MHz
Number of transistors	727 million	7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	69 Watt	75 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105C C	no data
Texture fill rate	17.60	131.2
Floating-point performance	0.2573 gflops	no data

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	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	168 mm	222 mm
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 8-pin

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB or 1 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	96 Bit
Memory clock speed	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz	15500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	54.4 GB/s	186.0 GB/s

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	DVIVGAHDMI	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.1	6.6
OpenGL	3.2	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	+	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 240 1.31

Arc A380 16.11
+1130%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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 240 507

Arc A380 6213
+1125%

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 240 5221

Arc A380 53979
+934%

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

−96%

49
+96%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

−1025%

45−50
+1025%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −917%	61 +917%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −1425%	60−65 +1425%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −1025%	45−50 +1025%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −6600%	65−70 +6600%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −2433%	75−80 +2433%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −8100%	160−170 +8100%
Hitman 3	6−7 −933%	60−65 +933%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −843%	130−140 +843%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −3650%	75−80 +3650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −1188%	100−110 +1188%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −242%	110−120 +242%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −1100%	72 +1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −1425%	60−65 +1425%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −1025%	45−50 +1025%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −6600%	65−70 +6600%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −2433%	75−80 +2433%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −8100%	160−170 +8100%
Hitman 3	6−7 −933%	60−65 +933%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −843%	130−140 +843%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −3650%	75−80 +3650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −900%	80 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −473%	60−65 +473%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −242%	110−120 +242%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −383%	29 +383%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −1425%	60−65 +1425%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −1025%	45−50 +1025%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −6600%	65−70 +6600%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −2750%	57 +2750%
Hitman 3	6−7 −933%	60−65 +933%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −271%	52 +271%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −663%	61 +663%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −209%	34 +209%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +32%	25 −32%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−3650%

75−80
+3650%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −5500%	55−60 +5500%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −2150%	45−50 +2150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −3000%	30−35 +3000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	30−35
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −3300%	30−35 +3300%
Hitman 3	7−8 −414%	35−40 +414%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −1140%	60−65 +1140%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −3800%	35−40 +3800%
Watch Dogs: Legion	6−7 −2567%	160−170 +2567%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−1150%

50−55
+1150%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

0−1

24−27

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −1800%	18−20 +1800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −1600%	16−18 +1600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	18−20
Far Cry 5	0−1	16−18

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−767%

24−27
+767%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50 +0%	50 +0%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	37 +0%	37 +0%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Hitman 3	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

This is how GT 240 and Arc A380 compete in popular games:

Arc A380 is 96% faster in 1080p

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 240 is 32% faster.
in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Arc A380 is 8100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GT 240 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
Arc A380 is ahead in 42 tests (68%)
there's a draw in 19 tests (31%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.31	16.11
Recency	17 November 2009	14 June 2022
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB or 1 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	69 Watt	75 Watt

GT 240 has a 8433.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 8.7% lower power consumption.

Arc A380, on the other hand, has a 1129.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A380 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.