ATI FireGL X2-256 vs Radeon HD 8240

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1190not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.97no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Rage 9 (2003−2006)
GPU code nameKalindiR360
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date1 November 2013 (11 years ago)1 March 2003 (21 year 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 cores128no data
Core clock speed400 MHz380 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million117 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate3.2003.040
Floating-point processing power0.1024 TFLOPSno data
ROPs48
TMUs88

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).

InterfaceIGPAGP 8x
WidthIGP1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x Molex

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 typeSystem SharedDDR2
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared256 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared350 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data22.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)9.0
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 November 2013 1 March 2003
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm

HD 8240 has an age advantage of 10 years, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 8240 and FireGL X2-256. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8240 is a desktop card while FireGL X2-256 is a workstation one.


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

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.


AMD Radeon HD 8240
Radeon HD 8240
ATI FireGL X2-256
FireGL X2-256

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

Community ratings

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


2.3 40 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8240 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate FireGL X2-256 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.