Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU vs Radeon R7 240

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 240 with Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU, including specs and performance data.

R7 240
2013, $69
2 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
2.16

Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU outperforms R7 240 by a whopping 191% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking929633
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.16no data
Power efficiency5.57no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)no data
GPU code nameOlandPanther Lake
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (12 years ago)8 January 2026 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$69 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

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 cores32016
Boost clock speed780 MHzno data
Number of transistors950 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nmno data
Power consumption (TDP)50 Wattno data
Texture fill rate14.00no data
Floating-point processing power0.448 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs20no data
L1 Cache80 KBno data
L2 Cache256 KB4 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 x8no data
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsN/Ano 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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1150 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth72 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 VGAno data
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® 12no data
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data

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 2.16
Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU 6.29
+191%

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
Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU 3085
+153%

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 HD5−6
−220%
16
+220%

Cost per frame, $

1080p13.80no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Palworld 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Palworld 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Palworld 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Palworld 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Palworld 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Palworld 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how R7 240 and Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU compete in popular games:

  • Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU is 220% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 57 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.16 6.29
Recency 8 October 2013 8 January 2026

Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU has a 191% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 12 years.

The Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 240 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 240 is a desktop graphics card while Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU is a notebook one.

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 1402 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU 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 Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.