GeForce GT 240M vs GTX 680M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 680M and GeForce GT 240M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 680M
2012
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
8.41
+1429%

GTX 680M outperforms GT 240M by a whopping 1429% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5031215
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.71no data
Power efficiency5.761.64
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGK104GT216
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date4 June 2012 (12 years ago)15 June 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$310.50 no data

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 cores134448
Core clock speed719 MHz550 MHz
Boost clock speed758 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate84.908.800
Floating-point processing power2.038 TFLOPS0.1162 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data174
ROPs328
TMUs11216

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0PCI-E 2.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHzUp to 600 (DDR2), Up to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth115.2 GB/s25.6 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 outputsSingle Link DVIDisplayPortDual Link DVIHDMIVGA
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.52.1
OpenCL1.11.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA++

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.

GTX 680M 8.41
+1429%
GT 240M 0.55

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.

GTX 680M 3239
+1421%
GT 240M 213

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.

GTX 680M 21534
+808%
GT 240M 2372

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:

900p67
+1575%
4−5
−1575%
Full HD63
+425%
12
−425%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.93no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 0−1
Battlefield 5 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%
Hitman 3 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+327%
10−12
−327%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+93.3%
30−33
−93.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 0−1
Battlefield 5 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%
Hitman 3 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+327%
10−12
−327%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+140%
10−11
−140%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+93.3%
30−33
−93.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%
Hitman 3 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+327%
10−12
−327%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+140%
10−11
−140%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+93.3%
30−33
−93.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Hitman 3 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Metro Exodus 10−12 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+5200%
1−2
−5200%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7 0−1
Hitman 3 4−5 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+1450%
2−3
−1450%
Metro Exodus 6−7 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 10−11 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%

This is how GTX 680M and GT 240M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 680M is 1575% faster in 900p
  • GTX 680M is 425% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 680M is 5200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 680M surpassed GT 240M in all 35 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.41 0.55
Recency 4 June 2012 15 June 2009
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 23 Watt

GTX 680M has a 1429.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 240M, on the other hand, has 334.8% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 680M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240M in performance tests.


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 680M
GeForce GTX 680M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 240M
GeForce GT 240M

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.


4.1 45 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 84 votes

Rate GeForce GT 240M 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.