Radeon RX 5700 vs R7 240

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 240 and Radeon RX 5700, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 240
2013, $69
2 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
2.14

RX 5700 outperforms R7 240 by a whopping 1486% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking934171
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1629.48
Power efficiency5.5714.69
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameOlandNavi 10
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (12 years ago)7 July 2019 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$69 $349

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RX 5700 has 18325% 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 cores3202304
Core clock speedno data1465 MHz
Boost clock speed780 MHz1725 MHz
Number of transistors950 million10,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt180 Watt
Texture fill rate14.00248.4
Floating-point processing power0.448 TFLOPS7.949 TFLOPS
ROPs864
TMUs20144
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 x8PCIe 4.0 x16
Length168 mm268 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsN/A1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1150 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s448.0 GB/s
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 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
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 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan-1.4

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
RX 5700 33.95
+1486%

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: 3951
RX 5700 14205
+1484%
Samples: 3455

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
RX 5700 23746
+1846%

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 HD7−8
−93.9%
114
1440p4−569
+1625%
4K2−343
+2050%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.863.06
+68.9%
1440p17.255.06
+70.7%
4K34.508.12
+76.5%
  • RX 5700 has 69% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 5700 has 71% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 5700 has 76% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 159 159
Counter-Strike 2 344 344
Cyberpunk 2077 84 84
Resident Evil 4 Remake 131 131

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 121 121
Battlefield 5 115 115
Counter-Strike 2 307 307
Cyberpunk 2077 75 75
Far Cry 5 156 156
Fortnite 166 166
Forza Horizon 4 132 132
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 151 151
Valorant 294 294

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 70 70
Battlefield 5 105 105
Counter-Strike 2 154 154
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 67 67
Dota 2 156 156
Far Cry 5 144 144
Fortnite 140 140
Forza Horizon 4 130 130
Grand Theft Auto V 137 137
Metro Exodus 87 87
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 144 144
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 147 147
Valorant 291 291

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 97 97
Cyberpunk 2077 58 58
Dota 2 146 146
Far Cry 5 135 135
Forza Horizon 4 118 118
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 139 139
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 91 91
Valorant 160 160

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 118 118

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 87 87
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250 240−250
Grand Theft Auto V 72 72
Metro Exodus 51 51
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 277 277

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 81 81
Cyberpunk 2077 36 36
Far Cry 5 93 93
Forza Horizon 4 103 103
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65 60−65

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 77 77

4K
High

Atomic Heart 27−30 27−30
Counter-Strike 2 25 25
Grand Theft Auto V 72 72
Metro Exodus 31 31
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 48 48
Valorant 231 231

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 54 54
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 35−40
Cyberpunk 2077 15 15
Dota 2 100 100
Far Cry 5 47 47
Forza Horizon 4 70 70
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 59 59

4K
Epic

Fortnite 39 39

This is how R7 240 and RX 5700 compete in popular games:

  • RX 5700 is 1529% faster in 1080p
  • RX 5700 is 1625% faster in 1440p
  • RX 5700 is 2050% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.14 33.95
Recency 8 October 2013 7 July 2019
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 180 Watt

R7 240 has 72% lower power consumption.

RX 5700, on the other hand, has a 1486% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 5700 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
4.2 2432 votes

Rate Radeon RX 5700 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 Radeon RX 5700, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.