GeForce GT 240 vs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

Place in the ranking	465	1025
Place by popularity	76	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.01
Power efficiency	23.55	1.32
Architecture	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	Tiger Lake Xe	GT215
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	15 August 2020 (4 years ago)	17 November 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$80

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 cores	96	96
Core clock speed	400 MHz	550 MHz
Boost clock speed	1350 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	no data	727 million
Manufacturing process technology	10 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	28 Watt	69 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105C C
Texture fill rate	no data	17.60
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.2573 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	8
TMUs	no data	32

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).

Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	no data	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	168 mm
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	no data	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	no data	512 MB or 1 GB
Memory bus width	no data	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	54.4 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 data	DVIVGAHDMI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	-	+
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 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12_1	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	no data	4.1
OpenGL	no data	3.2
OpenCL	no data	1.1
Vulkan	-	N/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.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 9.46
+622%

GT 240 1.31

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.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 25978
+398%

GT 240 5221

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	26 +4%	25 −4%
1440p	15 +650%	2−3 −650%
4K	11 +1000%	1−2 −1000%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	3.20
1440p	no data	40.00
4K	no data	80.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

20
+400%

4−5

−400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	22 +267%	6−7 −267%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21 +950%	2−3 −950%
Battlefield 5	27−30 +625%	4−5 −625%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	36 +800%	4−5 −800%
Cyberpunk 2077	16 +300%	4−5 −300%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +2100%	1−2 −2100%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +767%	3−4 −767%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +3050%	2−3 −3050%
Hitman 3	24 +300%	6−7 −300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	124 +786%	14−16 −786%
Metro Exodus	35 +775%	4−5 −775%
Red Dead Redemption 2	17 +750%	2−3 −750%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +288%	8−9 −288%
Watch Dogs: Legion	90 +173%	30−35 −173%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +283%	6−7 −283%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18 +800%	2−3 −800%
Battlefield 5	27−30 +625%	4−5 −625%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	32 +700%	4−5 −700%
Cyberpunk 2077	13 +225%	4−5 −225%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +2100%	1−2 −2100%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +767%	3−4 −767%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +3050%	2−3 −3050%
Hitman 3	23 +283%	6−7 −283%
Horizon Zero Dawn	112 +700%	14−16 −700%
Metro Exodus	28 +833%	3−4 −833%
Red Dead Redemption 2	26 +1200%	2−3 −1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30 +275%	8−9 −275%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +136%	10−12 −136%
Watch Dogs: Legion	84 +155%	30−35 −155%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14 +133%	6−7 −133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	23 +475%	4−5 −475%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +175%	4−5 −175%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +2100%	1−2 −2100%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +3050%	2−3 −3050%
Hitman 3	20 +233%	6−7 −233%
Horizon Zero Dawn	23 +64.3%	14−16 −64.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24 +200%	8−9 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14 +27.3%	10−12 −27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +84.8%	30−35 −84.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14
+600%

2−3

−600%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	7 +600%	1−2 −600%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +720%	5−6 −720%
Hitman 3	12−14 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +300%	5−6 −300%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +1200%	1−2 −1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	19 +850%	2−3 −850%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +900%	6−7 −900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18
+300%

4−5

−300%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8	0−1
Hitman 3	5−6	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +680%	5−6 −680%
Metro Exodus	7−8	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12 +1100%	1−2 −1100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	11 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
+200%

3−4

−200%

This is how Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs and GT 240 compete in popular games:

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 4% faster in 1080p
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 650% faster in 1440p
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 1000% faster in 4K

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 3050% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs surpassed GT 240 in all 48 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.46	1.31
Recency	15 August 2020	17 November 2009
Chip lithography	10 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	28 Watt	69 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs has a 622.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 146.4% lower power consumption.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240 in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is a notebook card while GeForce GT 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.