GT 220 vs GT 240M

#ad
Buy
VS
#ad
Buy

Combined performance score

GT 240M
0.52

GT 220 outperforms GT 240M by 6% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking11811170
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGT2xx (2009−2012)GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code nameN10P-GSGT216
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date15 June 2009 (14 years old)12 October 2009 (14 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$79.99
Current price$129 $121 (1.5x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 240M and GT 220 have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores4848
CUDA cores4848
Core clock speed550 MHz625 MHz
Number of transistors486 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt58 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate8.8009.840
Floating-point performance116.16 gflops144 gflops
Gigaflops174no data

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce GT 240M and GeForce GT 220 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.

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data6.6" (16.8 cm)
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data1-slot

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 typeDDR3, GDDR2, GDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 600 (DDR2), Up to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz790 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s25.3 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsSingle Link DVIDisplayPortDual Link DVIHDMIVGAVGADVIHDMI
Multi monitor support++
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x15362048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF + HDA

Technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.14.1
OpenGL2.13.1
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 240M 0.52
GT 220 0.55
+5.8%

GT 220 outperforms GT 240M by 6% in our combined benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GT 240M 203
GT 220 214
+5.4%

GT 220 outperforms GT 240M by 5% in Passmark.

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 HD12
−75%
21
+75%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how GT 240M and GT 220 compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • GT 220 is 75% faster than GT 240M

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 25 tests (100%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 0.52 0.55
Recency 15 June 2009 12 October 2009
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 58 Watt

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 240M and GeForce GT 220. The differences in performance seem too small.

Be aware that GeForce GT 240M is a notebook card while GeForce GT 220 is a desktop one.


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

User ratings

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


NVIDIA GeForce GT 240M
GeForce GT 240M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 220
GeForce GT 220

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User ratings: view and submit

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


3.1 69 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 651 vote

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GT 220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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