GeForce GT 240M LE vs NVS 510

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking918not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.07no data
Power efficiency3.54no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGK107G96C
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)15 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 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 cores19232
Core clock speed797 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate12.759.600
Floating-point processing power0.306 TFLOPS0.096 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs1616

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length160 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDR3DDR2
Maximum RAM amount2 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed891 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/s12.8 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 Connectors4x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA3.01.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 October 2012 15 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 23 Watt

NVS 510 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.

GT 240M LE, on the other hand, has 52.2% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between NVS 510 and GeForce GT 240M LE. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that NVS 510 is a workstation card while GeForce GT 240M LE 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 NVS 510
NVS 510
NVIDIA GeForce GT 240M LE
GeForce GT 240M LE

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.


2.9 60 votes

Rate NVS 510 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2 votes

Rate GeForce GT 240M LE 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.