GeForce GT 240M vs Quadro RTX 4000

Place in the ranking	148	1271
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	13.57	no data
Power efficiency	17.15	1.69
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	TU104	GT216
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	13 November 2018 (6 years ago)	15 June 2009 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$899	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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	2304	48
Core clock speed	1005 MHz	550 MHz
Boost clock speed	1545 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	13,600 million	486 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	160 Watt	23 Watt
Texture fill rate	222.5	8.800
Floating-point processing power	7.119 TFLOPS	0.1162 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	no data	174
ROPs	64	8
TMUs	144	16
Tensor Cores	288	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	36	no data

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 size	no data	medium sized
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	241 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	no data

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	GDDR6	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1625 MHz	Up to 600 (DDR2), Up to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth	416.0 GB/s	25.6 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors	3x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C	Single Link DVIDisplayPortDual Link DVIHDMIVGA
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

Power management

no data

8.0

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	6.8	4.1
OpenGL	4.6	2.1
OpenCL	3.0	1.1
Vulkan	1.3	N/A
CUDA	7.5	+
DLSS	+	-

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.

RTX 4000 35.99
+6957%

GT 240M 0.51

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.

RTX 4000 15079
+6979%

GT 240M 213

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

800−850
+6567%

−6567%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

1.12

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Hogwarts Legacy	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Hogwarts Legacy	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Valorant	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Far Cry 5	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Hogwarts Legacy	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Far Cry 5	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Hogwarts Legacy	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hogwarts Legacy	0−1	0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite

0−1

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

2−3

+0%

2−3

+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite

2−3

+0%

2−3

+0%

This is how RTX 4000 and GT 240M compete in popular games:

RTX 4000 is 6567% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 30 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	35.99	0.51
Recency	13 November 2018	15 June 2009
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	160 Watt	23 Watt

RTX 4000 has a 6956.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

GT 240M, on the other hand, has 595.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GT 240M is a notebook one.

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.

Quadro RTX 4000

GeForce GT 240M

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

7150M + nForce 630M

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU)

630

RTX 3080 Mobile

RX 540X

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU)

T2000 Mobile

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.6 515 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

3 112 votes

Rate GeForce GT 240M on a scale of 1 to 5:

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 4000 or GeForce GT 240M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.