FirePro M4150 vs GeForce GT 240

Place in performance ranking	987	799
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	0.31
Architecture	GT2xx (2009−2012)	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code name	GT215	Opal
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	17 November 2009 (14 years ago)	16 October 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$80	no data
Current price	$708 (8.9x MSRP)	$170

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

FirePro M4150 has 3000% better value for money than GT 240.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	96	384
CUDA cores	96	no data
Core clock speed	550 MHz	715 MHz
Number of transistors	727 million	950 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	69 Watt	no data
Maximum GPU temperature	105C C	no data
Texture fill rate	17.60	17.16
Floating-point performance	257.28 gflops	549.1 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GT 240 and FirePro M4150 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	6.6" (168mm) (16.8 cm)	no data
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB or 1 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz	4000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	54.4 GB/s	64 GB/s

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	DVIVGAHDMI	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	no data
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 (11_1)
Shader Model	4.1	5.1
OpenGL	3.2	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	+	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

GT 240 1.32

FirePro M4150 2.44
+84.8%

FirePro M4150 outperforms GeForce GT 240 by 85% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GT 240 509

FirePro M4150 945
+85.7%

FirePro M4150 outperforms GeForce GT 240 by 86% in Passmark.

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

−80%

45−50
+80%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

−75%

7−8
+75%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Hitman 3	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −71.4%	12−14 +71.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Hitman 3	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −71.4%	12−14 +71.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Hitman 3	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −75%	14−16 +75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −80%	9−10 +80%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Hitman 3	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 −71.4%	12−14 +71.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1