Tegra 3 vs Radeon R7 240 OEM

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)VLIW Vec4 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameOlandTegra 3
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 November 2013 (11 years ago)9 November 2011 (13 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 cores320no data
Core clock speed730 MHz416 MHz
Boost clock speed780 MHz520 MHz
Number of transistors950 million10 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate15.604.160
Floating-point processing power0.4992 TFLOPSno data
ROPs88
TMUs208

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 3.0 x8IGP
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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data+

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 VGANo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)N/A
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6ES 2.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 November 2013 9 November 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 20 Watt

R7 240 OEM has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

Tegra 3, on the other hand, has 150% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 240 OEM and Tegra 3. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R7 240 OEM is a desktop card while Tegra 3 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.


AMD Radeon R7 240 OEM
Radeon R7 240 OEM
NVIDIA Tegra 3
Tegra 3

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 47 votes

Rate Radeon R7 240 OEM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 5 votes

Rate Tegra 3 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.