GeForce GT 240M vs Iris Xe Graphics G7

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 and GeForce GT 240M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Iris Xe Graphics G7
2020
10.92
+1885%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 outperforms GT 240M by a whopping 1885% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4211208
Place by popularity35not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data1.66
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeGT216
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 August 2020 (4 years ago)15 June 2009 (15 years ago)

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 cores9648
Core clock speedno data550 MHz
Number of transistorsno data486 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data23 Watt
Texture fill rateno data8.800
Floating-point processing powerno data0.1162 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data174
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data16

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 supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16

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 typeDDR4GDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno dataUp to 600 (DDR2), Up to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidthno data25.6 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 Connectorsno dataSingle Link DVIDisplayPortDual Link DVIHDMIVGA
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

Power managementno data8.0
Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX 12_111.1 (10_1)
Shader Modelno data4.1
OpenGLno data2.1
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-+

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 HD230−240
+1817%
12
−1817%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+525%
4−5
−525%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+633%
3−4
−633%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+2267%
3−4
−2267%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+427%
10−12
−427%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+483%
6−7
−483%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+525%
4−5
−525%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+633%
3−4
−633%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+2267%
3−4
−2267%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+427%
10−12
−427%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+3400%
1−2
−3400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+483%
6−7
−483%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+525%
4−5
−525%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+2267%
3−4
−2267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Metro Exodus 16−18 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11 0−1
Battlefield 5 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+2350%
2−3
−2350%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+2300%
2−3
−2300%
Metro Exodus 9−10 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Battlefield 5 10−11 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 14−16 0−1

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

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%
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

Cyberpunk 2077 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 Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how Iris Xe Graphics G7 and GT 240M compete in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 is 1817% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 is 2900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 is ahead in 15 tests (43%)
  • there's a draw in 20 tests (57%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.92 0.55
Recency 15 August 2020 15 June 2009
Chip lithography 10 nm 40 nm

Iris Xe Graphics G7 has a 1885.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240M 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.


Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7
Iris Xe Graphics G7
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.


3.5 2413 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 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.