Radeon Xpress 200M vs GeForce GT 240

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in performance ranking	988	not rated
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	no data
Architecture	GT2xx (2009−2012)	no data
GPU code name	GT215	RC410
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	17 November 2009 (14 years ago)	18 February 2005 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$80	no data
Current price	$708 (8.9x MSRP)	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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	6
CUDA cores	96	no data
Core clock speed	550 MHz	2 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	350 MHz
Number of transistors	727 million	107 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	69 Watt	no data
Maximum GPU temperature	105C C	no data
Texture fill rate	17.60	0.67
Floating-point performance	257.28 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GT 240 and Radeon Xpress 200M 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 1.0 x16
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	None

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	no data
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB or 1 GB	0 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	54.4 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	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)	9.0 (9_0)
Shader Model	4.1	no data
OpenGL	3.2	2.0
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.

---

Pros & cons summary

---

Recency	17 November 2009	18 February 2005
Chip lithography	40 nm	130 nm

---

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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.

---