GeForce RTX 3090 vs Radeon R7 240

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 240 and GeForce RTX 3090, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 240
2013, $69
2 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
2.14
RTX 3090
2020, $1,499
24 GB GDDR6X, 350 Watt
63.27
+2857%

RTX 3090 outperforms R7 240 by a whopping 2857% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking93539
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1617.66
Power efficiency5.5614.08
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameOlandGA102
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (13 years ago)1 September 2020 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$69 $1,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

RTX 3090 has 10938% better value for money than R7 240.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

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 cores32010496
Core clock speedno data1395 MHz
Boost clock speed780 MHz1695 MHz
Number of transistors950 million28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt350 Watt
Texture fill rate14.00556.0
Floating-point processing power0.448 TFLOPS35.58 TFLOPS
ROPs8112
TMUs20328
Tensor Coresno data328
Ray Tracing Coresno data82
L1 Cache80 KB10.3 MB
L2 Cache256 KB6 MB

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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x16
Length168 mm336 mm
Width1-slot3-slot
Supplementary power connectorsN/A1x 12-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount2 GB24 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1150 MHz1219 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s936.2 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI++

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan-1.2
CUDA-8.5
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R7 240 2.14
RTX 3090 63.27
+2857%

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.

R7 240 897
Samples: 3956
RTX 3090 26470
+2851%
Samples: 17975

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.

R7 240 1220
RTX 3090 47739
+3813%

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 HD6−7
−96.8%
187
1440p4−5
−96.7%
120
4K2−381
+3950%

Cost per frame, $

1080p11.508.02
+30.3%
1440p17.2512.49
+27.6%
4K34.5018.51
+46.4%
  • RTX 3090 has 30% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RTX 3090 has 28% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RTX 3090 has 46% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 331 331
Counter-Strike 2 349 349
Cyberpunk 2077 209 209

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 262 262
Battlefield 5 172 172
Counter-Strike 2 347 347
Cyberpunk 2077 178 178
Far Cry 5 208 208
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Forza Horizon 4 254 254
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 350−400 350−400

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 156 156
Battlefield 5 158 158
Counter-Strike 2 309 309
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 154 154
Dota 2 217 217
Far Cry 5 196 196
Far Cry 6 169 169
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Forza Horizon 4 247 247
Grand Theft Auto V 171 171
Metro Exodus 176 176
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 369 369
Valorant 350−400 350−400

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 146 146
Cyberpunk 2077 136 136
Dota 2 213 213
Far Cry 5 183 183
Forza Horizon 4 217 217
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 182 182
Valorant 296 296

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 300−350 300−350

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 231 231
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 450−500 450−500
Far Cry 6 133 133
Grand Theft Auto V 150 150
Metro Exodus 115 115
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 400−450 400−450

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130 130
Cyberpunk 2077 93 93
Far Cry 5 171 171
Forza Horizon 4 197 197
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 153 153

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

4K
High

Atomic Heart 55−60 55−60
Counter-Strike 2 59 59
Far Cry 6 84 84
Grand Theft Auto V 182 182
Metro Exodus 76 76
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 154 154
Valorant 300−350 300−350

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 113 113
Counter-Strike 2 85−90 85−90
Cyberpunk 2077 46 46
Dota 2 202 202
Far Cry 5 108 108
Forza Horizon 4 153 153
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 95−100

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

This is how R7 240 and RTX 3090 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3090 is 3017% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3090 is 2900% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 3090 is 3950% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.14 63.27
Recency 8 October 2013 1 September 2020
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 24 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 350 Watt

R7 240 has 86% lower power consumption.

RTX 3090, on the other hand, has a 2857% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3090 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 240 in performance tests.

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.


3.3 1404 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.2 80419 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3090 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 240 or GeForce RTX 3090, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.