Check Prices $69.00
Check Prices $130.00
Select any two GPUs for comparison

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Radeon R7 240 2GB Radeon HD 4830 512MB
Cyberpunk 2077 786% 606%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 711% 546%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 684% 525%
FIFA 21 347% 256%
Grand Theft Auto VI 1147% 894%
Hitman 3 1053% 819%
Genshin Impact 786% 606%
Far Cry 6 1182% 922%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 1171% 913%
Watch Dogs Legion 755% 581%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the AMD Radeon HD 4830 512MB are noticeably better than the AMD Radeon R7 240 2GB.

The R7 240 has a 155 MHz higher core clock speed than the HD 4830, but the HD 4830 has 12 more Texture Mapping Units than the R7 240. As a result, the HD 4830 exhibits a 3.8 GTexel/s better Texture Fill Rate than the R7 240. This still holds weight but shader performance is generally more relevant, particularly since both of these GPUs support at least DirectX 10.

The R7 240 has a 155 MHz higher core clock speed than the HD 4830, but the HD 4830 has 8 more Render Output Units than the R7 240. As a result, the HD 4830 exhibits a 3.4 GPixel/s better Pixel Fill Rate than the R7 240. 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 three years more recently than the HD 4830, and so the R7 240 is likely to have far better driver support, meaning it will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the HD 4830 when running the latest games.

The R7 240 has 1536 MB more video memory than the HD 4830, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. However, overall, the HD 4830 has superior memory performance.

The HD 4830 has 28.8 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the R7 240, which means that the memory performance of the HD 4830 is slightly better than the R7 240.

The Radeon R7 240 2GB has 320 Shader Processing Units and the Radeon HD 4830 512MB has 640. However, the actual shader performance of the R7 240 is 212 and the actual shader performance of the HD 4830 is 258. The HD 4830 having 46 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the HD 4830 delivers a noticeably smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the R7 240.

The R7 240 transistor size technology is 27 nm (nanometers) smaller than the HD 4830. This means that the R7 240 is expected to run slightly cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the HD 4830.

The Radeon R7 240 2GB requires 30 Watts to run and the Radeon HD 4830 512MB requires 95 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 400 Watts for the R7 240 and a PSU with at least 450 Watts for the HD 4830. The HD 4830 requires 65 Watts more than the R7 240 to run. The difference is significant enough that the HD 4830 may have an adverse affect on your yearly electricity bills in comparison to the R7 240.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed730 MHzvs575 MHz
Boost Clock780 MHzvs-
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 Oland PROR700 RV790 LE
OC Potential Good vs Fair
Driver Support Great vs Poor
Release Date08 Oct 2013vs21 Oct 2008
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link

Resolution Performance

green tick vs -
vs green tick
vs green tick
vs green tick
vs green tick

GPU Memory

Memory2048 MBvs512 MB
Memory Speed900 MHzvs900 MHz
Memory Bus128 Bitvs256 Bit
Memory TypeDDR3vsGDDR3
Memory Bandwidth28.8GB/secvs57.6GB/sec
L2 Cache 512 KB green tick vs 0 KB
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units320vs640
Actual Shader Performance10%vs12%
Texture Mapping Units20vs32
Texture Rate14.6 GTexel/svs18.4 GTexel/s
Render Output Units8vs16
Pixel Rate5.8 GPixel/svs9.2 GPixel/s

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)4096x2160vs2560x1600
VGA Connections1vs0
DVI Connections1vs2
HDMI Connections1vs0
DisplayPort Connections-vs-

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power30 Wattsvs95 Watts
Recommended PSU400 Watts & 18 Ampsvs450 Watts & 33 Amps

GPU Features

Shader Model5.0vs4.1
Open GL4.4vs3.3
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUnono

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended ProcessorIntel Core i3-4130 3.4GHzvsIntel Core 2 Duo E8400 3.0GHz
Recommended RAM4 GBvs4 GB
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution1366x768vs1600x900

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewNote: 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.
Radeon HD 4830 is a high-end GPU based on the 55nm, third unified shader architecture, R700.
It's based on the RV790 LE Core (related to Radeon HD 4860) and offers 640 Shader Processing Units, 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs a 256-bit memory interface of standard GDDR3. The central unit runs at 575MHz and the memory clock runs at up to 900MHz.
It performs much worse when compared to Radeon HD 4850/Radeon HD 4870 due to being paired with standard GDDR3, featuring less Shading Units & TMUs and being relatively underclocked. However, it's expected to consume only up to 95 Watt.
Some of today's modern games should run fluently at high settings but with modest resolutions. DirectX 11 games aren't supported.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
GPU Variants