Recommended System Requirements | ||
---|---|---|
Game | Radeon R7 240 2GB | GeForce GTX 560 Ti Gigabyte OC 1GB Edition |
Hitman 3 | 1053% | 252% |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 786% | 171% |
Assassins Creed: Valhalla | 711% | 148% |
Resident Evil 8 | 786% | 171% |
FIFA 21 | 347% | 37% |
Grand Theft Auto VI | 1147% | 281% |
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War | 684% | 140% |
Genshin Impact | 786% | 171% |
Far Cry 6 | 1182% | 292% |
The Medium | 1006% | 238% |
In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia GeForce GTX 560 Ti Gigabyte OC 1GB Edition are massively better than the AMD Radeon R7 240 2GB.
The GTX 560 Ti has a 170 MHz higher core clock speed and 44 more Texture Mapping Units than the R7 240. This results in the GTX 560 Ti providing 43 GTexel/s better texturing performance. This still holds weight but shader performance is generally more relevant, particularly since both of these GPUs support at least DirectX 10.
The GTX 560 Ti has a 170 MHz higher core clock speed and 24 more Render Output Units than the R7 240. This results in the GTX 560 Ti providing 23 GPixel/s better pixeling performance. However, both GPUs support DirectX 9 or above, and pixeling performance is only really relevant when comparing older cards.
The R7 240 was released over a year more recently than the GTX 560 Ti, and so the R7 240 is likely to have better driver support, meaning it will be more optimized for running the latest games when compared to the GTX 560 Ti.
The R7 240 has 1024 MB more video memory than the GTX 560 Ti, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. However, overall, the GTX 560 Ti has superior memory performance.
The GTX 560 Ti has 99.2 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the R7 240, which means that the memory performance of the GTX 560 Ti is massively better than the R7 240.
The Radeon R7 240 2GB has 320 Shader Processing Units and the GeForce GTX 560 Ti Gigabyte OC 1GB Edition has 384. However, the actual shader performance of the R7 240 is 212 and the actual shader performance of the GTX 560 Ti is 691. The GTX 560 Ti having 479 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the GTX 560 Ti delivers a massively smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the R7 240.
The R7 240 transistor size technology is 12 nm (nanometers) smaller than the GTX 560 Ti. This means that the R7 240 is expected to run slightly cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the GTX 560 Ti.
The Radeon R7 240 2GB requires 30 Watts to run but there is no entry for the GeForce GTX 560 Ti Gigabyte OC 1GB Edition. We would recommend a PSU with at least 400 Watts for the R7 240.
Core Speed | 730 MHz | vs | ![]() | 900 MHz | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Boost Clock | 780 MHz | ![]() | vs | - | |
Architecture | GCN 1.1 Oland PRO | Fermi GF114-400-A1 | |||
OC Potential | Good |
![]() |
vs | Poor | |
Driver Support | Great |
![]() | vs | Poor | |
Release Date | 08 Oct 2013 | ![]() | vs | 01 Jan 2011 | |
GPU Link | GD Link | GD Link | |||
Approved | ![]() | ![]() | |||
Comparison |
1366x768 | 6.4
|
![]() |
vs | - | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1600x900 | 4.9
|
vs | ![]() |
8.2
|
|
1920x1080 | 3.1
|
vs | ![]() |
6.4
|
|
2560x1440 | 2.3
|
vs | ![]() |
4.4
|
|
3840x2160 | 1.5
|
![]() |
vs | - |
Memory | 2048 MB | ![]() | vs | 1024 MB | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Memory Speed | 900 MHz | vs | ![]() | 1000 MHz | |
Memory Bus | 128 Bit | vs | ![]() | 256 Bit | |
Memory Type | DDR3 | vs | ![]() | GDDR5 | |
Memory Bandwidth | 28.8GB/sec | vs | ![]() | 128GB/sec | |
L2 Cache | 512 KB | ![]() |
vs | ![]() |
512 KB |
Delta Color Compression | no | vs | no | ||
Memory Performance | 0% | ![]() |
vs | ![]() |
0% |
Comparison |
Shader Processing Units | 320 | vs | ![]() | 384 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Actual Shader Performance | 10% | vs | ![]() | 33% | |
Technology | 28nm | ![]() | vs | 40nm | |
Texture Mapping Units | 20 | vs | ![]() | 64 | |
Texture Rate | 14.6 GTexel/s | vs | ![]() | 57.6 GTexel/s | |
Render Output Units | 8 | vs | ![]() | 32 | |
Pixel Rate | 5.8 GPixel/s | vs | ![]() | 28.8 GPixel/s | |
Comparison |
Max Digital Resolution (WxH) | 4096x2160 | ![]() | vs | 2560x1600 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
VGA Connections | 1 | ![]() | vs | 0 | |
DVI Connections | 1 | vs | ![]() | 2 | |
HDMI Connections | 1 | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 1 |
DisplayPort Connections | - | vs | - | ||
Comparison |
Max Power | 30 Watts | - | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Recommended PSU | 400 Watts & 18 Amps | - |
DirectX | 12.0 | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 12.0 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Shader Model | 5.0 | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 5.0 |
Open GL | 4.4 | vs | ![]() | 4.5 | |
Open CL | - | vs | - | ||
Notebook GPU | no | no | |||
SLI/Crossfire | no | vs | ![]() | yes | |
Dedicated | yes | ![]() | vs | ![]() | yes |
Comparison |
Recommended Processor | Intel Core i3-4130 3.4GHz | ![]() | vs | Intel Core i5-2300 2.8GHz | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Recommended RAM | 4 GB | ![]() | vs | 8 GB | |
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution | 1366x768 | vs | ![]() | 1600x900 |
Performance Value | ![]() |
---|
Mini Review | Note: This Graphics Card has 2 variants: one with DDR3 and another with GDDR5. This is the DDR3 Version. Radeon R7 240 2GB offers a core codenamed Oland PRO and thus features 320 Shader Processing Units, 20 TMUs and 8 ROPs, on a 128-bit bus width of standard DDR3. While the central unit runs at 730MHz and goes up to 780MHz, in Turbo Mode, the memory clock operates at 900MHz. With a rated board TDP of 30W, it requires no extra power connectors. Compared to Radeon R7 250, its performance is significantly lower (over 25% slower), especially at higher resolutions due to the limited memory bandwidth. Still, the TDP is relatively low and so this card may be used on low end systems and offer a reasonable upgrade, when compared to integrated graphics. | GeForce GTX 560 Ti Gigabyte OC 1GB Edition is one of the many special editions of GeForce GTX 560 Ti. The new features include a new cooling system and an increase in the core-clock from 822MHz to 900MHz. Benchmarks indicate the performance is around 5% better than the standard edition. |
---|