GeForce GT 240M LE vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100

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
ArchitectureGen. 4 (2007−2010)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameCrestlineG96C
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date9 May 2007 (19 years ago)15 January 2010 (16 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores832
Core clock speed500 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistorsno data314 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13.5 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rateno data9.600
Floating-point processing powerno data0.096 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data16
L2 Cacheno data32 KB

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16

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 typeno dataDDR2
Maximum RAM amountno data512 MB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data400 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data12.8 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX1011.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data3.3
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-1.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 9 May 2007 15 January 2010
Chip lithography 90 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 23 Watt

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 has 77% lower power consumption.

GT 240M LE, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 64% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 and GeForce GT 240M LE. We've got no test results to judge.

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.


3.6 164 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 4 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 or GeForce GT 240M LE, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.