GeForce GT 240M vs GTX 660

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 660 with GeForce GT 240M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 660
2012
2 GB GDDR5, 140 Watt
10.37
+1785%

GTX 660 outperforms GT 240M by a whopping 1785% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4371211
Place by popularity58not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.28no data
Power efficiency5.151.66
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGK106GT216
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date6 September 2012 (12 years ago)15 June 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 no data

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 cores96048
Core clock speed980 MHz550 MHz
Boost clock speed1033 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,540 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)140 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate82.568.800
Floating-point processing power1.981 TFLOPS0.1162 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data174
ROPs248
TMUs8016

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length241 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB1 GB
Memory bus width192-bit GDDR5128 Bit
Memory clock speed6.0 GB/sUp to 600 (DDR2), Up to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth144.2 GB/s25.6 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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPortSingle Link DVIDisplayPortDual Link DVIHDMIVGA
Multi monitor support4 displays+
HDMI++
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x15362048x1536
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray+-
3D Gaming+-
3D Vision+-
Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.32.1
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/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 660 10.37
+1785%
GT 240M 0.55

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 660 4000
+1778%
GT 240M 213

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 HD47
+292%
12
−292%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.87no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how GTX 660 and GT 240M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 660 is 292% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 35 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.37 0.55
Recency 6 September 2012 15 June 2009
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 140 Watt 23 Watt

GTX 660 has a 1785.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 240M, on the other hand, has 508.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 660 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 660 is a desktop card while GeForce GT 240M is a notebook one.


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 660
GeForce GTX 660
NVIDIA GeForce GT 240M
GeForce GT 240M

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.


3.7 4258 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 660 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 74 votes

Rate GeForce GT 240M 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.