Radeon R7 240 vs R9 380X

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

R9 380X
2015
4 GB GDDR5
16.01
+584%

R9 380X outperforms R7 240 by a whopping 584% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking308806
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.080.16
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2017)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameAntiguaOland
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferencereference
Release date19 November 2015 (8 years ago)8 October 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 $69
Current price$11.81 (0.1x MSRP)$109 (1.6x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 380X has 4325% better value for money than R7 240.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2048320
Compute units32no data
Boost clock speed970 MHz780 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate124.214.00
Floating-point performance3,973 gflops499.2 gflops

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 supportPCIe 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length221 mm168 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors​2 x 6-pinN/A
Bridgeless CrossFire1no 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed970 MHz1150 MHz
Memory bandwidth182.4 GB/s72 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
Eyefinity1no data
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI++
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration--
CrossFire11
Enduro--
FRTC1no data
FreeSync11
HD3D+-
LiquidVR1no data
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
ZeroCore+-
VCE+no data
DDMA audio++

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan+no data
Mantle+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

R9 380X 16.01
+584%
R7 240 2.34

R9 380X outperforms R7 240 by 584% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R9 380X 6194
+584%
R7 240 906

R9 380X outperforms R7 240 by 584% in Passmark.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R9 380X 9510
+680%
R7 240 1220

R9 380X outperforms R7 240 by 680% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.01 2.34
Recency 19 November 2015 8 October 2013
Cost $229 $69
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 50 Watt

The Radeon R9 380X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 240 in performance tests.


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 R9 380X
Radeon R9 380X
AMD Radeon R7 240
Radeon R7 240

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.


3.8 167 votes

Rate Radeon R9 380X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 1058 votes

Rate Radeon R7 240 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.