UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) vs GeForce GT 240

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 240 with UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H), including specs and performance data.

GT 240
2009
512 MB or 1 GB GDDR5, 69 Watt
1.31

UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) outperforms GT 240 by an impressive 76% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1031853
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency1.30no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Gen. 12 (2021−2023)
GPU code nameGT215Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date17 November 2009 (15 years ago)30 March 2021 (3 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 cores9616
Core clock speed550 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1450 MHz
Number of transistors727 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)69 Wattno data
Maximum GPU temperature105C Cno data
Texture fill rate17.60no data
Floating-point processing power0.2573 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs32no 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 supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length168 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount512 MB or 1 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth54.4 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 ConnectorsDVIVGAHDMIno data
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12_1
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL3.2no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) 2.30
+75.6%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 240 5221
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) 7190
+37.7%

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
+127%
11
−127%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.20no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−35.7%
18−20
+35.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−9.1%
35−40
+9.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−35.7%
18−20
+35.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−37.5%
11
+37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−9.1%
35−40
+9.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−35.7%
18−20
+35.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−75%
14
+75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+120%
5
−120%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−9.1%
35−40
+9.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 1−2
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 1−2

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 1−2
Far Cry 5 0−1 1−2

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

This is how GT 240 and UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) compete in popular games:

  • GT 240 is 127% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 240 is 120% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 240 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is ahead in 42 tests (81%)
  • there's a draw in 9 tests (17%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.31 2.30
Recency 17 November 2009 30 March 2021
Chip lithography 40 nm 10 nm

UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) has a 75.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 240 is a desktop card while UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is a notebook one.


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
Intel UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H)

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.


3.4 916 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.5 361 vote

Rate UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) 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.