Tesla M10 vs GeForce GT 240

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 240 with Tesla M10, including specs and performance data.

GT 240
2009
512 MB or 1 GB GDDR5, 69 Watt
1.13

Tesla M10 outperforms GT 240 by a whopping 550% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1083551
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency1.322.63
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGT215GM107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date17 November 2009 (15 years ago)18 May 2016 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$80 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores96640 ×4
Core clock speed550 MHz1033 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1306 MHz
Number of transistors727 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)69 Watt225 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105C Cno data
Texture fill rate17.6052.24 ×4
Floating-point processing power0.2573 TFLOPS1.672 TFLOPS ×4
ROPs816 ×4
TMUs3240 ×4
L1 Cacheno data320 KB
L2 Cache64 KB2 MB

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length168 mm267 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB or 1 GB8 GB ×4
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit ×4
Memory clock speed1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz1300 MHz
Memory bandwidth54.4 GB/s83.2 GB/s ×4

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsDVIVGAHDMINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.15.1
OpenGL3.24.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA+5.0

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GT 240 1.13
Tesla M10 7.35
+550%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

GT 240 Samples: 1889 499
Tesla M10 Samples: 12 3248
+551%

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 HD25
−540%
160−170
+540%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.20no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Fortnite 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%
Valorant 30−35
−536%
210−220
+536%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
−543%
180−190
+543%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Dota 2 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Fortnite 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Valorant 30−35
−536%
210−220
+536%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Dota 2 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Valorant 30−35
−536%
210−220
+536%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−525%
75−80
+525%
Valorant 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−533%
95−100
+533%
Valorant 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

This is how GT 240 and Tesla M10 compete in popular games:

  • Tesla M10 is 540% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.13 7.35
Recency 17 November 2009 18 May 2016
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB or 1 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 69 Watt 225 Watt

GT 240 has a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 226.1% lower power consumption.

Tesla M10, on the other hand, has a 550.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Tesla M10 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 240 is a desktop graphics card while Tesla M10 is a workstation one.

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
NVIDIA Tesla M10
Tesla M10

Other comparisons

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.


3.4 987 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 16 votes

Rate Tesla M10 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 240 or Tesla M10, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.