ATI Rage 128 PRO vs GeForce GT 240

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1027not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency1.32no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Rage 4 (1998−1999)
GPU code nameGT215Rage 4 PRO
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date17 November 2009 (15 years ago)1 August 1999 (25 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$80 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores96no data
Core clock speed550 MHz118 MHz
Number of transistors727 million8 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm250 nm
Power consumption (TDP)69 Wattno data
Maximum GPU temperature105C Cno data
Texture fill rate17.600.24
Floating-point processing power0.2573 TFLOPSno data
ROPs82
TMUs322

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 supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16AGP 4x
Length168 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5SDR
Maximum RAM amount512 MB or 1 GB32 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz143 MHz
Memory bandwidth54.4 GB/s1.144 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 ConnectorsDVIVGAHDMI1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)6.0
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL3.21.2
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 17 November 2009 1 August 1999
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB or 1 GB 32 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 250 nm

GT 240 has an age advantage of 10 years, a 1638300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 525% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 240 and Rage 128 PRO. 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.

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.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 240
GeForce GT 240
ATI Rage 128 PRO
Rage 128 PRO

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 899 votes

Rate GeForce GT 240 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 31 vote

Rate Rage 128 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.