Radeon R7 240 vs GeForce GTX 460M SLI

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 460M SLI with Radeon R7 240, including specs and performance data.

GTX 460M SLI
2010
2x1536 MB GDDR5
4.95
+112%

GTX 460M SLI outperforms R7 240 by a whopping 112% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking627841
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.16
Power efficiencyno data5.38
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameN11E-GSOland
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date3 September 2010 (14 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$69

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 cores384320
Core clock speed675 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data780 MHz
Number of transistorsno data950 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data14.00
Floating-point processing powerno data0.448 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data20

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x8
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataN/A

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2x1536 MB2 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1150 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data72 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 Connectorsno data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire-+
FreeSync-+
DDMA audiono data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11DirectX® 12
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
CUDA+-

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:

900p52
+117%
24−27
−117%
Full HD64
+113%
30−35
−113%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.30

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Hitman 3 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+129%
14−16
−129%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+119%
21−24
−119%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Hitman 3 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+129%
14−16
−129%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+119%
21−24
−119%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Hitman 3 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+129%
14−16
−129%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+119%
21−24
−119%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Hitman 3 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

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

This is how GTX 460M SLI and R7 240 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 460M SLI is 117% faster in 900p
  • GTX 460M SLI is 113% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.95 2.33
Recency 3 September 2010 8 October 2013
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm

GTX 460M SLI has a 112.4% higher aggregate performance score.

R7 240, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 460M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 240 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 460M SLI is a notebook card while Radeon R7 240 is a desktop 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 GTX 460M SLI
GeForce GTX 460M SLI
AMD Radeon R7 240
Radeon R7 240

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate GeForce GTX 460M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 1156 votes

Rate Radeon R7 240 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.