GeForce GT 240 vs ATI Radeon HD 4550

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 4550 and GeForce GT 240, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI HD 4550
2008
256 MB DDR2, 25 Watt
0.60

GT 240 outperforms ATI HD 4550 by a whopping 115% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12111041
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiency1.691.31
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameRV710GT215
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date30 September 2008 (16 years ago)17 November 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$59 $80

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

ATI HD 4550 and GT 240 have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores8096
Core clock speed600 MHz550 MHz
Number of transistors242 million727 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt69 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105C C
Texture fill rate4.80017.60
Floating-point processing power0.096 TFLOPS0.2573 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs832

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
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length168 mm168 mm
Heightno data4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDR2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount256 MB512 MB or 1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed655 MHz1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz
Memory bandwidth10.48 GB/s54.4 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortDVIVGAHDMI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX10.1 (10_1)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.14.1
OpenGL3.33.2
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/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.

ATI HD 4550 0.60
GT 240 1.29
+115%

  • Passmark

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.

ATI HD 4550 235
GT 240 503
+114%

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 HD10−12
−150%
25
+150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.90
−84.4%
3.20
+84.4%
  • GT 240 has 84% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
World of Tanks 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
World of Tanks 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how ATI HD 4550 and GT 240 compete in popular games:

  • GT 240 is 150% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 42 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.60 1.29
Recency 30 September 2008 17 November 2009
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 512 MB or 1 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 69 Watt

ATI HD 4550 has 176% lower power consumption.

GT 240, on the other hand, has a 115% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 204700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GT 240 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4550 in performance tests.

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.


ATI Radeon HD 4550
Radeon HD 4550
NVIDIA GeForce GT 240
GeForce GT 240

Other comparisons

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.


3.4
114 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate GeForce GT 240 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 4550 or GeForce GT 240, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.