Radeon R7 240 vs RX Vega 5

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 5 with Radeon R7 240, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 5
2020
15 Watt
4.65
+99.6%

RX Vega 5 outperforms R7 240 by a whopping 100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking653852
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.16
Power efficiency21.345.35
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameVegaOland
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date7 January 2020 (5 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$69

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 cores320320
Boost clock speed1400 MHz780 MHz
Number of transistorsno data950 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data14.00
Floating-point processing powerno data0.448 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data20

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 supportno dataPCIe 3.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x8
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataN/A

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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1150 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data72 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire-+
FreeSync-+
DDMA audiono data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_1DirectX® 12
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2

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.

RX Vega 5 4.65
+99.6%
R7 240 2.33

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.

RX Vega 5 2438
+99.8%
R7 240 1220

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 HD19
+111%
9−10
−111%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data7.67

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7
+133%
3−4
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+125%
4−5
−125%
Elden Ring 11
+120%
5−6
−120%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Forza Horizon 4 21
+110%
10−11
−110%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18
+100%
9−10
−100%
Valorant 18
+100%
9−10
−100%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Dota 2 21
+110%
10−11
−110%
Elden Ring 6
+100%
3−4
−100%
Far Cry 5 21
+110%
10−11
−110%
Fortnite 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
Forza Horizon 4 17
+113%
8−9
−113%
Grand Theft Auto V 13
+117%
6−7
−117%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 41
+128%
18−20
−128%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4
+100%
2−3
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Valorant 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
World of Tanks 50
+108%
24−27
−108%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Dota 2 37
+106%
18−20
−106%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
Forza Horizon 4 14
+100%
7−8
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+122%
18−20
−122%
Valorant 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Elden Ring 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
World of Tanks 30−35
+106%
16−18
−106%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Valorant 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Elden Ring 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Fortnite 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Valorant 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

This is how RX Vega 5 and R7 240 compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 5 is 111% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.65 2.33
Recency 7 January 2020 8 October 2013
Chip lithography 7 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 50 Watt

RX Vega 5 has a 99.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 5 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 240 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 5 is a notebook card while Radeon R7 240 is a desktop 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 RX Vega 5
Radeon RX Vega 5
AMD Radeon R7 240
Radeon R7 240

Other comparisons

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.


4 217 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 5 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 1215 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.