GeForce GT 240M vs GTX 460

Place in performance ranking	563	1179
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.00	no data
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code name	GF104	N10P-GS
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	12 July 2010 (14 years ago)	15 June 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 460 and GT 240M have a nearly equal value for money.

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	336	48
Core clock speed	675 MHz	550 MHz
Number of transistors	1,950 million	486 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	160 Watt	23 Watt
Texture fill rate	37.80	8.800
Floating-point performance	907.2 gflops	116.16 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 460 and GeForce GT 240M 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	no data	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	210 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	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	DDR3, GDDR2, GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	3600 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	86.4 GB/s	25.6 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	2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI	No outputs
HDMI	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	5.1	4.1
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	2.1	+

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 460 5.86
+965%

GT 240M 0.55

GTX 460 outperforms GT 240M by 965% based on our aggregate 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: 26%

GTX 460 2263
+962%

GT 240M 213

GTX 460 outperforms GT 240M by 962% 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 HD

120−130
+900%

−900%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Hitman 3	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Hitman 3	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%