Radeon R7 240 vs GeForce GTX 560 Ti

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 560 Ti and Radeon R7 240, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 560 Ti
2011
1 GB GDDR5, 170 Watt
7.94
+241%

GTX 560 Ti outperforms R7 240 by a whopping 241% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking519850
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.840.16
Power efficiency3.205.32
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGF114Oland
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date25 January 2011 (13 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 $69

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 560 Ti has 1050% better value for money than R7 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 cores384320
Core clock speed823 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data780 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)170 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate52.6714.00
Floating-point processing power1.263 TFLOPS0.448 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs6420

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 supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length229 mm168 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinN/A

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1002 MHz1150 MHz
Memory bandwidth128.3 GB/s72 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI++

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire-+
FreeSync-+
DDMA audiono data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A-
CUDA2.1-

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.

GTX 560 Ti 7.94
+241%
R7 240 2.33

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.

GTX 560 Ti 3058
+241%
R7 240 897

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 560 Ti 3470
+184%
R7 240 1220

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:

900p63
+250%
18−20
−250%
Full HD66
+267%
18−20
−267%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.773.83

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+243%
7−8
−243%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+271%
14−16
−271%
Hitman 3 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+275%
12−14
−275%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+250%
16−18
−250%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+243%
7−8
−243%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+271%
14−16
−271%
Hitman 3 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+275%
12−14
−275%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+250%
16−18
−250%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+271%
14−16
−271%
Hitman 3 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+275%
12−14
−275%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+250%
16−18
−250%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Hitman 3 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+257%
14−16
−257%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Hitman 3 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+250%
8−9
−250%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%

This is how GTX 560 Ti and R7 240 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 560 Ti is 250% faster in 900p
  • GTX 560 Ti is 267% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.94 2.33
Recency 25 January 2011 8 October 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 170 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 560 Ti has a 240.8% higher aggregate performance score.

R7 240, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 240% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 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 GTX 560 Ti
GeForce GTX 560 Ti
AMD Radeon R7 240
Radeon R7 240

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.


3.9 826 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 560 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 1194 votes

Rate Radeon R7 240 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.