Radeon RX 6500 XT vs GeForce GT 240

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 240 and Radeon RX 6500 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 240
2009
512 MB or 1 GB GDDR5, 69 Watt
1.31

RX 6500 XT outperforms GT 240 by a whopping 1791% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in performance ranking1032218
Place by popularitynot in top-10084
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.0158.64
ArchitectureGT2xx (2009−2012)Navi / RDNA2 (2020−2022)
GPU code nameGT215Navi 24
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date17 November 2009 (14 years ago)19 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$80 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6500 XT has 586300% 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 cores961024
CUDA cores96no data
Core clock speed550 MHz2610 MHz
Number of transistors727 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)69 Watt107 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105C Cno data
Texture fill rate17.60180.2
Floating-point performance0.2573 gflops5.765 gflops

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 supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
Length168 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB or 1 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz18000 MHz
Memory bandwidth54.4 GB/s143.9 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 ConnectorsDVIVGAHDMI1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.6
OpenGL3.24.6
OpenCL1.12.2
VulkanN/A1.3
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
RX 6500 XT 24.77
+1791%

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
RX 6500 XT 9557
+1785%

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
RX 6500 XT 76445
+1364%

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 HD3−4
−2067%
65
+2067%
1440p1−2
−3100%
32
+3100%
4K0−118

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−1700%
72
+1700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−800%
50−55
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−1150%
50−55
+1150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−1250%
54
+1250%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−5600%
55−60
+5600%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−2067%
65−70
+2067%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−7150%
140−150
+7150%
Hitman 3 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−714%
110−120
+714%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3100%
60−65
+3100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−950%
80−85
+950%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−212%
100−110
+212%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−800%
50−55
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−1150%
50−55
+1150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−750%
34
+750%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−5600%
55−60
+5600%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−2067%
65−70
+2067%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−7150%
140−150
+7150%
Hitman 3 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−714%
110−120
+714%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3100%
60−65
+3100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−1238%
107
+1238%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−382%
50−55
+382%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−212%
100−110
+212%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−800%
50−55
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−1150%
50−55
+1150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−650%
30
+650%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−5600%
55−60
+5600%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−7150%
140−150
+7150%
Hitman 3 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−557%
92
+557%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−938%
83
+938%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−391%
54
+391%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+32%
25
−32%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3100%
60−65
+3100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−4600%
45−50
+4600%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−1800%
35−40
+1800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−2500%
24−27
+2500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 27−30
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1600%
17
+1600%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−2700%
27−30
+2700%
Hitman 3 7−8
−314%
27−30
+314%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−1220%
66
+1220%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
−2233%
140−150
+2233%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−925%
40−45
+925%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 18−20

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−500%
6
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 14−16
Far Cry 5 0−1 14−16

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−600%
21−24
+600%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 51
+0%
51
+0%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 43
+0%
43
+0%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 31
+0%
31
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 23
+0%
23
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Metro Exodus 57
+0%
57
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 56
+0%
56
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hitman 3 10
+0%
10
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 25
+0%
25
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10
+0%
10
+0%

This is how GT 240 and RX 6500 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6500 XT is 2067% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6500 XT is 3100% faster in 1440p

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 RX 6500 XT is 7150% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 240 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • RX 6500 XT is ahead in 47 tests (69%)
  • there's a draw in 20 tests (29%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.31 24.77
Recency 17 November 2009 19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB or 1 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 69 Watt 107 Watt

GT 240 has a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 55.1% lower power consumption.

RX 6500 XT, on the other hand, has a 1790.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6500 XT 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.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 240
GeForce GT 240
AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT
Radeon RX 6500 XT

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 839 votes

Rate GeForce GT 240 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 3136 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6500 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.