HD Graphics 400 vs GeForce GT 240

Place in performance ranking	988	1040
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	no data
Architecture	GT2xx (2009−2012)	Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code name	GT215	Braswell GT1
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	17 November 2009 (14 years ago)	1 April 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$80	no data
Current price	$708 (8.9x MSRP)	$710

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 240 and HD Graphics 400 have a nearly equal value for money.

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	96
CUDA cores	96	no data
Core clock speed	550 MHz	320 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	640 MHz
Number of transistors	727 million	189 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	69 Watt	6 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105C C	no data
Texture fill rate	17.60	7.680
Floating-point performance	257.28 gflops	134.4 gflops

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 3.0 x1
Length	6.6" (168mm) (16.8 cm)	no data
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	1-slot	IGP
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	DDR3L
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB or 1 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	54.4 GB/s	no data

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	4.3
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.80
CUDA	+	no data

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
+19%

21−24

−19%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5
+33.3%

3−4

−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2	0−1
Metro Exodus	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%

This is how GT 240 and HD Graphics 400 compete in popular games:

GT 240 is 19% faster than HD Graphics 400 in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.32	1.12
Recency	17 November 2009	1 April 2015
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB or 1 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	69 Watt	6 Watt