Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile vs Radeon HD 8240

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8240 with RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

HD 8240
2013
15 Watt
0.64
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
2024
4 GB GDDR6, 35 Watt
27.26
+4159%

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms HD 8240 by a whopping 4159% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1188200
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.9754.29
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameKalindiAD107
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date1 November 2013 (11 years ago)26 February 2024 (less than a year 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 cores1282048
Core clock speed400 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2025 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate3.200129.6
Floating-point processing power0.1024 TFLOPS8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs864
Tensor Coresno data64
Ray Tracing Coresno 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
InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x8
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.0 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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA-8.9

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 8240 0.64
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 27.26
+4159%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD 8240 428
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 20239
+4634%

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 8240 1377
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 66297
+4715%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 8240 293
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 14136
+4733%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−4150%
170−180
+4150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−4100%
210−220
+4100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−3991%
450−500
+3991%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−4067%
250−260
+4067%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−4067%
1250−1300
+4067%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−4150%
170−180
+4150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−4100%
210−220
+4100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−3991%
450−500
+3991%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−4067%
250−260
+4067%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−3900%
400−450
+3900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−4067%
1250−1300
+4067%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−4150%
170−180
+4150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−4100%
210−220
+4100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−3991%
450−500
+3991%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−4067%
250−260
+4067%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−3900%
400−450
+3900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−4067%
1250−1300
+4067%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%
Hitman 3 6−7
−4067%
250−260
+4067%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−4150%
85−90
+4150%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.64 27.26
Recency 1 November 2013 26 February 2024
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 35 Watt

HD 8240 has 133.3% lower power consumption.

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 4159.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8240 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8240 is a desktop card while RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation 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.


AMD Radeon HD 8240
Radeon HD 8240
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile

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.


2.3 40 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8240 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 15 votes

Rate RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 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.