Radeon R5 M240 vs 820M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon 820M and Radeon R5 M240, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
820M outperforms R5 M240 by a moderate 14% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 1053 | 1101 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Architecture | RDNA 3+ (2024) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
GPU code name | Krackan Point | Jet |
Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Release date | 2 June 2024 (1 year ago) | 18 September 2014 (10 years ago) |
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 | 128 | 320 |
Core clock speed | no data | 1000 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 2900 MHz | no data |
Number of transistors | no data | 690 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm | 28 nm |
Texture fill rate | no data | 20.60 |
Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.6592 TFLOPS |
ROPs | no data | 8 |
TMUs | no data | 20 |
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 | medium sized | no data |
Bus support | no data | Not Listed |
Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
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 | Not Listed |
Maximum RAM amount | no data | 0 MB |
Memory bus width | no data | Not Listed |
Memory clock speed | 7500 MHz | no data |
Memory bandwidth | no data | 14.4 GB/s |
Shared memory | + | - |
Resizable BAR | + | - |
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 | no data | No outputs |
Eyefinity | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
AppAcceleration | - | + |
HD3D | - | + |
PowerTune | - | + |
DualGraphics | - | + |
ZeroCore | - | + |
Switchable graphics | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | no data | DirectX® 11 |
Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
OpenCL | no data | Not Listed |
Mantle | - | + |
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
+0%
| 14
+0%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
God of War | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Fortnite | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
God of War | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
Valorant | 30−35
+3.1%
|
30−35
−3.1%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Fortnite | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
God of War | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Valorant | 30−35
+3.1%
|
30−35
−3.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
God of War | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
1440p
High Preset
Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Valorant | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Valorant | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
God of War | 0−1 | 0−1 |
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Valorant | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Dota 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
This is how Radeon 820M and R5 M240 compete in popular games:
- A tie in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 820M is 150% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Radeon 820M performs better in 27 tests (64%)
- there's a draw in 15 tests (36%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 1.29 | 1.13 |
Recency | 2 June 2024 | 18 September 2014 |
Chip lithography | 4 nm | 28 nm |
Radeon 820M has a 14.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 600% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon 820M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 M240 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.