GeForce GT 240 vs GTX 280M SLI

Place in the ranking	724	1025
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.01
Power efficiency	1.59	1.32
Architecture	G9x (2007−2010)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	N10E-GTX	GT215
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	2 March 2009 (15 years ago)	17 November 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$80

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	256	96
Core clock speed	585 MHz	550 MHz
Number of transistors	1508 Million	727 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	69 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105C C
Texture fill rate	no data	17.60
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.2573 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	8
TMUs	no data	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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	no data	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	168 mm
Height	no data	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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	GDDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	512 MB or 1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	950 MHz	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	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	no data	DVIVGAHDMI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal

API compatibility

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

DirectX	10	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	no data	4.1
OpenGL	no data	3.2
OpenCL	no data	1.1
Vulkan	-	N/A
CUDA	+	+

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.

GTX 280M SLI 3.43
+162%

GT 240 1.31

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.

GTX 280M SLI 9435
+80.7%

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

65−70
+160%

−160%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

3.20

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7
+50%

4−5

−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Battlefield 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Hitman 3	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 +71.4%	14−16 −71.4%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +21.2%	30−35 −21.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Battlefield 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Hitman 3	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 +71.4%	14−16 −71.4%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +36.4%	10−12 −36.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +21.2%	30−35 −21.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Hitman 3	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 +71.4%	14−16 −71.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +36.4%	10−12 −36.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +21.2%	30−35 −21.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
+300%

2−3

−300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	20−22 +233%	6−7 −233%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+75%

4−5

−75%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+33.3%

3−4

−33.3%

This is how GTX 280M SLI and GT 240 compete in popular games:

GTX 280M SLI is 160% faster in 1080p

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 280M SLI is 850% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 280M SLI is ahead in 47 tests (98%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.43	1.31
Recency	2 March 2009	17 November 2009
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	512 MB or 1 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	69 Watt

GTX 280M SLI has a 161.8% higher aggregate performance score.

GT 240, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 months, a 25500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 37.5% more advanced lithography process, and 117.4% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 280M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 280M SLI is a notebook card while GeForce GT 240 is a desktop one.

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