GeForce GT 240 vs ATI Radeon HD 4850

Place in the ranking	811	1031
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.26	0.01
Power efficiency	1.66	1.30
Architecture	TeraScale (2005−2013)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	RV770	GT215
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	25 June 2008 (16 years ago)	17 November 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	$80

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

ATI HD 4850 has 2500% better value for money than GT 240.

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	800	96
Core clock speed	625 MHz	550 MHz
Number of transistors	956 million	727 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	69 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105C C
Texture fill rate	25.00	17.60
Floating-point processing power	1 TFLOPS	0.2573 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	40	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	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	246 mm	168 mm
Height	no data	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	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	GDDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	512 MB or 1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	993 MHz	1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz
Memory bandwidth	63.55 GB/s	54.4 GB/s

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	2x DVI, 1x S-Video	DVIVGAHDMI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal

API compatibility

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

DirectX	10.1 (10_1)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	4.1	4.1
OpenGL	3.3	3.2
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	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.

ATI HD 4850 2.66
+103%

GT 240 1.31

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.

ATI HD 4850 1026
+104%

GT 240 504

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.

ATI HD 4850 8972
+71.8%

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:

900p	29 +107%	14−16 −107%
Full HD	40 +60%	25 −60%
1200p	19 +111%	9−10 −111%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

4.98

3.20

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6
+25%

4−5

−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +50%	14−16 −50%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +15.2%	30−35 −15.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +50%	14−16 −50%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +18.2%	10−12 −18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +15.2%	30−35 −15.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +50%	14−16 −50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +18.2%	10−12 −18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +15.2%	30−35 −15.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+200%

2−3

−200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+50%

4−5

−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+33.3%

3−4

−33.3%

This is how ATI HD 4850 and GT 240 compete in popular games:

ATI HD 4850 is 107% faster in 900p
ATI HD 4850 is 60% faster in 1080p
ATI HD 4850 is 111% faster in 1200p

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the ATI HD 4850 is 550% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

ATI HD 4850 is ahead in 46 tests (96%)
there's a draw in 2 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.66	1.31
Recency	25 June 2008	17 November 2009
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	512 MB or 1 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	69 Watt

ATI HD 4850 has a 103.1% higher aggregate performance score.

GT 240, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 102300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 37.5% more advanced lithography process, and 59.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 4850 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 240 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.