GeForce GT 240M vs HD Graphics 620

Place in performance ranking	801	1182
Place by popularity	41	not in top-100
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation	0.49	no data
Architecture	Gen. 9.5 Kaby Lake (2015−2017)	GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code name	Kaby-Lake GT2	N10P-GS
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	30 August 2016 (7 years ago)	15 June 2009 (14 years ago)
Current price	$353	$129

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

HD Graphics 620 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	24	48
CUDA cores	no data	48
Core clock speed	300 MHz	550 MHz
Boost clock speed	1050 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	189 million	486 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	23 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.20	8.800
Floating-point performance	403.2 gflops	116.16 gflops
Gigaflops	no data	174

Form Factor & Compatibility

Information on HD Graphics 620 and GeForce GT 240M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x1	PCIe 2.0 x16

Memory type	DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4	DDR3, GDDR2, GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	32 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	64/128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	Up to 600 (DDR2), Up to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	25.6 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 Connectors	No outputs	Single Link DVIDisplayPortDual Link DVIHDMIVGA
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	no data	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536

Supported GPU Technologies

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

Power management	no data	8.0
Quick Sync	+	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	4.6	2.1
OpenCL	2.1	1.1
Vulkan	+	N/A
CUDA	no data	+

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.

HD Graphics 620 2.42
+365%

GT 240M 0.52

HD Graphics 620 outperforms GeForce GT 240M by 365% 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%

HD Graphics 620 935
+361%

GT 240M 203

HD Graphics 620 outperforms GeForce GT 240M by 361% 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%

HD Graphics 620 5803
+145%

GT 240M 2372

HD Graphics 620 outperforms GeForce GT 240M by 145% 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:

Full HD

14
+16.7%

−16.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6
+66.7%

3−4

−66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	6 +500%	1−2 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	11 +450%	2−3 −450%
Hitman 3	4−5	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5 −20%	6−7 +20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Hitman 3	4−5	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4	0−1
Metro Exodus	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Hitman 3	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Hitman 3	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%

This is how HD Graphics 620 and GT 240M compete in popular games:

HD Graphics 620 is 16.7% faster than GT 240M in 1080p

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

in Far Cry 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD Graphics 620 is 300% faster than the GT 240M.
in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 240M is 20% faster than the HD Graphics 620.

All in all, in popular games:

HD Graphics 620 is ahead in 22 tests (88%)
GT 240M is ahead in 1 test (4%)
there's a draw in 2 tests (8%)

Pros & Cons Summary

Performance score	2.42	0.52
Recency	30 August 2016	15 June 2009
Maximum RAM amount	32 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	23 Watt