Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile vs GeForce GT 240M

Place in the ranking	1219	206
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.75	24.06
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GT216	TU106
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	15 June 2009 (15 years ago)	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)

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 cores	48	2304
CUDA cores	48	no data
Core clock speed	550 MHz	945 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1380 MHz
Number of transistors	486 million	10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	80 Watt
Texture fill rate	8.800	198.7
Floating-point processing power	0.1162 TFLOPS	6.359 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	174	no data
ROPs	8	64
TMUs	16	144
Tensor Cores	no data	288
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	36

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).

Laptop size	medium sized	large
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16

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	GDDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 600 (DDR2), Up to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	25.6 GB/s	448.0 GB/s
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 Connectors	Single Link DVIDisplayPortDual Link DVIHDMIVGA	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
G-SYNC support	-	+

Supported technologies

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

Power management	8.0	no data
VR Ready	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model	4.1	6.5
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	+	7.5

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 240M 0.55

RTX 3000 Mobile 26.23
+4669%

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 240M 213

RTX 3000 Mobile 10116
+4649%

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 240M 2372

RTX 3000 Mobile 50309
+2021%

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 HD	12 −683%	94 +683%
4K	1−2 −8700%	88 +8700%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−1333%

40−45
+1333%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −1825%	77 +1825%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1667%	50−55 +1667%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1333%	40−45 +1333%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −6700%	65−70 +6700%
Hitman 3	5−6 −960%	50−55 +960%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −991%	120−130 +991%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −1383%	85−90 +1383%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −253%	100−110 +253%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −1325%	55−60 +1325%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1667%	50−55 +1667%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1333%	40−45 +1333%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −6700%	65−70 +6700%
Hitman 3	5−6 −960%	50−55 +960%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −991%	120−130 +991%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −1383%	85−90 +1383%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −460%	55−60 +460%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −253%	100−110 +253%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −875%	39 +875%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1667%	50−55 +1667%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1333%	40−45 +1333%
Hitman 3	5−6 −960%	50−55 +960%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −991%	120−130 +991%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −1383%	85−90 +1383%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −460%	56 +460%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −253%	100−110 +253%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−3900%

40−45
+3900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	27−30
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1600%	16−18 +1600%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −2900%	30−33 +2900%
Hitman 3	6−7 −417%	30−35 +417%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −1700%	50−55 +1700%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −14500%	140−150 +14500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−1367%

40−45
+1367%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	14−16

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−1050%

21−24
+1050%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Metro Exodus	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Metro Exodus	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

65−70

+0%

65−70

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5

50−55

+0%

50−55

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Metro Exodus	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Hitman 3	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Metro Exodus	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

This is how GT 240M and RTX 3000 Mobile compete in popular games:

RTX 3000 Mobile is 683% faster in 1080p
RTX 3000 Mobile is 8700% faster in 4K

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 3000 Mobile is 14500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RTX 3000 Mobile is ahead in 35 tests (50%)
there's a draw in 35 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.55	26.23
Recency	15 June 2009	27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	80 Watt

GT 240M has 247.8% lower power consumption.

RTX 3000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 4669.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 240M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

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