GeForce GT 240 vs HD Graphics 520

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 520 with GeForce GT 240, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 520
2015
32 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4, 15 Watt
2.16
+64.9%

HD Graphics 520 outperforms GT 240 by an impressive 65% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8641030
Place by popularity42not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiency9.871.30
ArchitectureGeneration 9.0 (2015−2016)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameSkylake GT2GT215
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 September 2015 (9 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 cores19296
Core clock speed300 MHz550 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million727 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt69 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105C C
Texture fill rate21.6017.60
Floating-point processing power0.3456 TFLOPS0.2573 TFLOPS
ROPs38
TMUs2432

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 dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfaceRing BusPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
Heightno data4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount32 GB512 MB or 1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data54.4 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentDVIVGAHDMI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.44.1
OpenGL4.63.2
OpenCL3.01.1
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.

HD Graphics 520 2.16
+64.9%
GT 240 1.31

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.

HD Graphics 520 831
+64.9%
GT 240 504

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.

HD Graphics 520 5722
+9.6%
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:

900p20
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Full HD10
−150%
25
+150%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.20

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 5
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+9.1%
30−35
−9.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+9.1%
30−35
−9.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+9.1%
30−35
−9.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 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
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how HD Graphics 520 and GT 240 compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 520 is 67% faster in 900p
  • GT 240 is 150% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD Graphics 520 is 400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 520 is ahead in 43 tests (90%)
  • there's a draw in 5 tests (10%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.16 1.31
Recency 1 September 2015 17 November 2009
Maximum RAM amount 32 GB 512 MB or 1 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 69 Watt

HD Graphics 520 has a 64.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 360% lower power consumption.

GT 240, on the other hand, has a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The HD Graphics 520 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 520 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.

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.


Intel HD Graphics 520
HD Graphics 520
NVIDIA GeForce GT 240
GeForce GT 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 3116 votes

Rate HD Graphics 520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 916 votes

Rate GeForce GT 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.