GeForce RTX 3090 vs GT 240

Place in the ranking	1027	24
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	14.90
Power efficiency	1.32	13.80
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GT215	GA102
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	17 November 2009 (15 years ago)	1 September 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$80	$1,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 3090 has 148900% better value for money than GT 240.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	96	10496
Core clock speed	550 MHz	1395 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1695 MHz
Number of transistors	727 million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	69 Watt	350 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105C C	no data
Texture fill rate	17.60	556.0
Floating-point processing power	0.2573 TFLOPS	35.58 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	112
TMUs	32	328
Tensor Cores	no data	328
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	82

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 support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	168 mm	336 mm
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	1-slot	3-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB or 1 GB	24 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz	1219 MHz
Memory bandwidth	54.4 GB/s	936.2 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.1	6.5
OpenGL	3.2	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	+	8.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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 1.31

RTX 3090 69.31
+5191%

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.

GT 240 506

RTX 3090 26735
+5184%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 240 5221

RTX 3090 124350
+2282%

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	25 −712%	203 +712%
1440p	2−3 −6450%	131 +6450%
4K	1−2 −8900%	90 +8900%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.20	7.38
1440p	40.00	11.44
4K	80.00	16.66

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

−5075%

207
+5075%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −2550%	159 +2550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −2875%	110−120 +2875%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −4300%	176 +4300%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −11600%	110−120 +11600%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −5533%	160−170 +5533%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −11800%	230−240 +11800%
Hitman 3	6−7 −1850%	117 +1850%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −1707%	250−260 +1707%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −6400%	130 +6400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −3550%	290−300 +3550%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −506%	200 +506%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −4017%	247 +4017%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −2875%	110−120 +2875%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −3675%	151 +3675%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −11600%	110−120 +11600%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −5533%	160−170 +5533%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −11800%	230−240 +11800%
Hitman 3	6−7 −1850%	117 +1850%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −1707%	250−260 +1707%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −6000%	120−130 +6000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −4925%	402 +4925%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −1255%	140−150 +1255%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −503%	199 +503%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −1700%	108 +1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −2875%	110−120 +2875%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −3250%	134 +3250%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −11600%	110−120 +11600%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −10750%	217 +10750%
Hitman 3	6−7 −1833%	116 +1833%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −2007%	295 +2007%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −4288%	351 +4288%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −1545%	181 +1545%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −224%	107 +224%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−6350%

129
+6350%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −16400%	160−170 +16400%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −9200%	93 +9200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	80−85
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −9200%	93 +9200%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −8000%	80−85 +8000%
Hitman 3	7−8 −1543%	115 +1543%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −4560%	233 +4560%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −15100%	152 +15100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	6−7 −3283%	203 +3283%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−3075%

127
+3075%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

0−1

65−70

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −6900%	70 +6900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −5600%	57 +5600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	50−55
Far Cry 5	0−1	50−55

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−3600%

111
+3600%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	114 +0%	114 +0%
Battlefield 5	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	144 +0%	144 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	105 +0%	105 +0%
Battlefield 5	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	144 +0%	144 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	79 +0%	79 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Metro Exodus	139 +0%	139 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	266 +0%	266 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Hitman 3	83 +0%	83 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	141 +0%	141 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	153 +0%	153 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	46 +0%	46 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	153 +0%	153 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	159 +0%	159 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60 +0%	60 +0%

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

RTX 3090 is 712% faster in 1080p
RTX 3090 is 6450% faster in 1440p
RTX 3090 is 8900% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 3090 is 16400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RTX 3090 is ahead in 48 tests (71%)
there's a draw in 20 tests (29%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.31	69.31
Recency	17 November 2009	1 September 2020
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB or 1 GB	24 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	69 Watt	350 Watt

GT 240 has a 2033.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 407.2% lower power consumption.

RTX 3090, on the other hand, has a 5190.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.

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

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.