GeForce GT 240 vs GTX 1050 Mobile

Place in performance ranking	382	988
Place by popularity	89	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	11.53	0.01
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code name	GP107B	GT215
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	3 January 2017 (7 years ago)	17 November 2009 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$80
Current price	$256	$708 (8.9x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1050 Mobile has 115200% better value for money than GT 240.

Detailed specifications

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 cores	640	96
CUDA cores	640	96
Core clock speed	1354 MHz	550 MHz
Boost clock speed	1493 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	3,300 million	727 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	69 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	97 °C	105C C
Texture fill rate	59.72	17.60
Floating-point performance	no data	257.28 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile and GeForce GT 240 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 size	large	no data
Bus support	PCIe 3.0	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	6.6" (168mm) (16.8 cm)
Height	no data	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None
SLI options	-	no 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4000 MB	512 MB or 1 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	7008 MHz	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz
Memory bandwidth	112 GB/s	54.4 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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	DP 1.4, HDMI 2.0b, Dual Link-DVI	DVIVGAHDMI
Multi monitor support	+	+
HDMI	no data	+
HDCP	2.2	no data
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
G-SYNC support	+	no data
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal

Supported technologies

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

GameStream	+	no data
GPU Boost	3.0	no data
Ansel	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	6.4	4.1
OpenGL	4.5	3.2
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/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.

GTX 1050 Mobile 11.53
+773%

GT 240 1.32

GTX 1050 Mobile outperforms GT 240 by 773% based on our aggregated 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%

GTX 1050 Mobile 4461
+776%

GT 240 509

GTX 1050 Mobile outperforms GT 240 by 776% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 1050 Mobile 26560
+409%

GT 240 5221

GTX 1050 Mobile outperforms GT 240 by 409% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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:

900p	73 +813%	8−9 −813%
Full HD	46 +84%	25 −84%
1440p	24 +1100%	2−3 −1100%
4K	15 +1400%	1−2 −1400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	37 +825%	4−5 −825%
Battlefield 5	51 +920%	5−6 −920%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40 +344%	9−10 −344%
Far Cry 5	39 +875%	4−5 −875%
Far Cry New Dawn	38 +850%	4−5 −850%
Forza Horizon 4	55 +5400%	1−2 −5400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27 +575%	4−5 −575%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	33 +371%	7−8 −371%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30 +900%	3−4 −900%
Battlefield 5	44 +780%	5−6 −780%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	33 +267%	9−10 −267%
Far Cry 5	36 +800%	4−5 −800%
Far Cry New Dawn	37 +825%	4−5 −825%
Forza Horizon 4	52 +5100%	1−2 −5100%
Metro Exodus	19 +850%	2−3 −850%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14 +250%	4−5 −250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	29 +314%	7−8 −314%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	39 +875%	4−5 −875%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18 +800%	2−3 −800%
Battlefield 5	37 +825%	4−5 −825%
Far Cry 5	33 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Far Cry New Dawn	33 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Forza Horizon 4	37 +3600%	1−2 −3600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	22 +450%	4−5 −450%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18 +500%	3−4 −500%
Metro Exodus	11 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	17 +240%	5−6 −240%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	13 +1200%	1−2 −1200%
Battlefield 5	26 +1200%	2−3 −1200%
Far Cry 5	21 +950%	2−3 −950%
Far Cry New Dawn	24 +1100%	2−3 −1100%
Forza Horizon 4	26 +1200%	2−3 −1200%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10 +400%	2−3 −400%
Metro Exodus	7	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7	0−1
Battlefield 5	13 +1200%	1−2 −1200%
Far Cry 5	11 +267%	3−4 −267%
Far Cry New Dawn	11 +120%	5−6 −120%
Forza Horizon 4	15 +1400%	1−2 −1400%

This is how GTX 1050 Mobile and GT 240 compete in popular games:

GTX 1050 Mobile is 813% faster in 900p
GTX 1050 Mobile is 84% faster in 1080p
GTX 1050 Mobile is 1100% faster in 1440p
GTX 1050 Mobile is 1400% faster in 4K

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1050 Mobile is 5400% faster than the GT 240.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, GTX 1050 Mobile surpassed GT 240 in all 18 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	11.53	1.32
Recency	3 January 2017	17 November 2009
Maximum RAM amount	4000 MB	512 MB or 1 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	69 Watt