GeForce GT 240 vs Iris Plus Graphics 655

Place in performance ranking	647	985
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.90	0.01
Architecture	Gen. 9.5 Kaby Lake (2015−2017)	GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code name	Kaby Lake GT3e	GT215
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	1 September 2017 (6 years ago)	17 November 2009 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$80
Current price	$999	$708 (8.9x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Iris Plus Graphics 655 has 8900% 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	48	96
CUDA cores	no data	96
Core clock speed	300 MHz	550 MHz
Boost clock speed	1200 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	189 million	727 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	69 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105C C
Texture fill rate	50.40	17.60
Floating-point performance	no data	257.28 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Iris Plus Graphics 655 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.

Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x1	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

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	DDR3/DDR4	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	512 MB or 1 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	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	No outputs	DVIVGAHDMI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	no data	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
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.

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	3.2
OpenCL	2.1	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.103	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.

Iris Plus Graphics 655 4.21
+219%

GT 240 1.32

Iris Plus Graphics 655 outperforms GeForce GT 240 by 219% 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: 25%

Iris Plus Graphics 655 1736
+240%

GT 240 511

Iris Plus Graphics 655 outperforms GeForce GT 240 by 240% 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%

Iris Plus Graphics 655 12287
+135%

GT 240 5221

Iris Plus Graphics 655 outperforms GeForce GT 240 by 135% 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	23 −8.7%	25 +8.7%
1440p	15 +275%	4−5 −275%
4K	15 +275%	4−5 −275%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8
+75%

4−5

−75%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Battlefield 5	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Hitman 3	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Horizon Zero Dawn	19 +35.7%	14−16 −35.7%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18 +100%	9−10 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	20−22 +66.7%	12−14 −66.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Battlefield 5	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	40 +1233%	3−4 −1233%
Hitman 3	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +64.3%	14−16 −64.3%
Metro Exodus	5 +400%	1−2 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	17 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	11 +175%	4−5 −175%
Watch Dogs: Legion	20−22 +66.7%	12−14 −66.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10 −40%	14−16 +40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	15 +66.7%	9−10 −66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6 +50%	4−5 −50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	20−22 +66.7%	12−14 −66.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12
+450%

2−3

−450%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Hitman 3	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
+100%

4−5

−100%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Hitman 3	0−1	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	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	3−4	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
+66.7%

3−4

−66.7%

This is how Iris Plus Graphics 655 and GT 240 compete in popular games:

GT 240 is 9% faster in 1080p
Iris Plus Graphics 655 is 275% faster in 1440p
Iris Plus Graphics 655 is 275% faster in 4K

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Plus Graphics 655 is 1233% faster.
in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 240 is 40% faster.

All in all, in popular games: