Radeon R5 310 OEM vs GeForce GT 240
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 984 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Value for money | 0.01 | no data |
| Architecture | GT2xx (2009−2012) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | GT215 | Caicos |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 17 November 2009 (14 years ago) | 5 May 2015 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | no data |
| Current price | $708 (8.9x MSRP) | no data |
Value for money
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Technical specs
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 | 160 |
| CUDA cores | 96 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 775 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 727 million | 370 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 69 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105C C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 17.60 | 6.200 |
| Floating-point performance | 257.28 gflops | 248.0 gflops |
Size and 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 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 6.6" (168mm) (16.8 cm) | 168 mm |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Memory
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 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB or 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 54.4 GB/s | 14.4 GB/s |
Video outputs and ports
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 DVI, 1x HDMI |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.2 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | no data |
Advantages and disadvantages
| Recency | 17 November 2009 | 5 May 2015 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB or 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 69 Watt | 35 Watt |
We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 240 and Radeon R5 310 OEM. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
