GeForce RTX 3090 vs Radeon R5 240 OEM

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated24
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data14.90
Power efficiencyno data13.80
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameOlandGA102
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 November 2013 (11 years ago)1 September 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,499

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 cores38410496
Core clock speed730 MHz1395 MHz
Boost clock speed780 MHz1695 MHz
Number of transistors950 million28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt350 Watt
Texture fill rate18.72556.0
Floating-point processing power0.599 TFLOPS35.58 TFLOPS
ROPs8112
TMUs24328
Tensor Coresno data328
Ray Tracing Coresno data82

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x16
Length168 mm336 mm
Width1-slot3-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 12-pin

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 typeDDR3GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount2 GB24 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1219 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s936.2 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2
CUDA-8.5

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 November 2013 1 September 2020
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 24 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 350 Watt

R5 240 OEM has 600% lower power consumption.

RTX 3090, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R5 240 OEM and GeForce RTX 3090. We've got no test results to judge.


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 R5 240 OEM
Radeon R5 240 OEM
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
GeForce RTX 3090

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.


3.6 538 votes

Rate Radeon R5 240 OEM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.2 78994 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3090 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.