GeForce GT 240 vs UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N)

Place in the ranking	853	1034
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.01
Power efficiency	no data	1.31
Architecture	Gen. 12 (2021−2023)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	Alder Lake Xe	GT215
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	3 January 2023 (2 years ago)	17 November 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$80

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 cores	24	96
Core clock speed	450 MHz	550 MHz
Boost clock speed	750 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	no data	727 million
Manufacturing process technology	10 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	69 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105C C
Texture fill rate	no data	17.60
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.2573 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	8
TMUs	no data	32

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 support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	no data	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	168 mm
Height	no data	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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 type	no data	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	no data	512 MB or 1 GB
Memory bus width	no data	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	54.4 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 Connectors	no data	DVIVGAHDMI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12_1	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	no data	4.1
OpenGL	no data	3.2
OpenCL	no data	1.1
Vulkan	-	N/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. 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.

UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) 2.32
+77.1%

GT 240 1.31

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.

UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) 5776
+10.6%

GT 240 5221

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 HD

−257%

25
+257%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

3.20

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Elden Ring	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Forza Horizon 4	10 +25%	8−9 −25%
Metro Exodus	7 +133%	3−4 −133%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	4 −125%	9−10 +125%
Dota 2	5 +400%	1−2 −400%
Elden Ring	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Far Cry 5	12 +20%	10−11 −20%
Fortnite	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Forza Horizon 4	10 +25%	8−9 −25%
Grand Theft Auto V	5 +400%	1−2 −400%
Metro Exodus	5 +150%	2−3 −150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +57.1%	14−16 −57.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
World of Tanks	40−45 +53.6%	27−30 −53.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +40%	10−11 −40%
Forza Horizon 4	11 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +57.1%	14−16 −57.1%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring	1−2	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1
World of Tanks	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Valorant	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Elden Ring	1−2	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Fortnite	1−2	0−1
Valorant	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Dota 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3

+0%

2−3

+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

This is how UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) and GT 240 compete in popular games:

GT 240 is 257% faster in 1080p

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

in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) is 400% faster.
in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 240 is 125% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) is ahead in 30 tests (68%)
GT 240 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 13 tests (30%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.32	1.31
Recency	3 January 2023	17 November 2009
Chip lithography	10 nm	40 nm

UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) has a 77.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240 in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) is a notebook card while GeForce GT 240 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.