Quadro FX 4500 vs GeForce GT 240

Place in performance ranking	986	1165
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation	0.01	no data
Architecture	GT2xx (2009−2012)	Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code name	GT215	G70
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	17 November 2009 (14 years ago)	28 July 2005 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$80	$2,499
Current price	$708 (8.9x MSRP)	$115 (0x MSRP)

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 240 and FX 4500 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	no data
CUDA cores	96	no data
Core clock speed	550 MHz	430 MHz
Number of transistors	727 million	302 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	110 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	69 Watt	109 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105C C	no data
Texture fill rate	17.60	10.32
Floating-point performance	257.28 gflops	no data

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 1.0 x16
Length	6.6" (168mm) (16.8 cm)	267 mm
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-pin

Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB or 1 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz	1050 MHz
Memory bandwidth	54.4 GB/s	33.6 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	2x DVI, 1x S-Video
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)	9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model	4.1	3.0
OpenGL	3.2	2.1
OpenCL	1.1	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
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 1.31
+122%

FX 4500 0.59

GeForce GT 240 outperforms Quadro FX 4500 by 122% 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
+124%

FX 4500 227

GeForce GT 240 outperforms Quadro FX 4500 by 124% 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

25
+150%

10−12

−150%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5
+300%

1−2

−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2	0−1
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Hitman 3	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

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

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3	0−1
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
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 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%

This is how GT 240 and FX 4500 compete in popular games:

GT 240 is 150% faster than FX 4500 in 1080p

Pros & Cons Summary

Performance score	1.31	0.59
Recency	17 November 2009	28 July 2005
Cost	$80	$2499
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB or 1 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	40 nm	110 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	69 Watt	109 Watt