Recommended System Requirements | ||
---|---|---|
Game | Radeon R7 240 2GB | GeForce 9800 GT |
Hitman 3 | 1053% | 805% |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 786% | 595% |
Assassins Creed: Valhalla | 711% | 536% |
Resident Evil 8 | 786% | 595% |
FIFA 21 | 347% | 251% |
Grand Theft Auto VI | 1147% | 878% |
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War | 684% | 515% |
Genshin Impact | 786% | 595% |
Far Cry 6 | 1182% | 906% |
The Medium | 1006% | 768% |
In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia GeForce 9800 GT are noticeably better than the AMD Radeon R7 240 2GB.
The R7 240 has a 130 MHz higher core clock speed than the GeForce 9800 GT, but the GeForce 9800 GT has 36 more Texture Mapping Units than the R7 240. As a result, the GeForce 9800 GT exhibits a 19 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 130 MHz higher core clock speed than the GeForce 9800 GT, but the GeForce 9800 GT has 8 more Render Output Units than the R7 240. As a result, the GeForce 9800 GT exhibits a 3.8 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 GeForce 9800 GT, 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 GeForce 9800 GT when running the latest games.
The R7 240 has 1536 MB more video memory than the GeForce 9800 GT, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. However, overall, the GeForce 9800 GT has superior memory performance.
The GeForce 9800 GT has 28.8 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the R7 240, which means that the memory performance of the GeForce 9800 GT is slightly better than the R7 240.
The Radeon R7 240 2GB has 320 Shader Processing Units and the GeForce 9800 GT has 112. However, the actual shader performance of the R7 240 is 212 and the actual shader performance of the GeForce 9800 GT is 168. The R7 240 having 44 better shader performance is not particularly notable, as altogether the GeForce 9800 GT performs better when taking into account other relevant data.
The R7 240 transistor size technology is 37 nm (nanometers) smaller than the GeForce 9800 GT. This means that the R7 240 is expected to run much cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the GeForce 9800 GT.
The Radeon R7 240 2GB requires 30 Watts to run and the GeForce 9800 GT requires 105 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 400 Watts for the R7 240 and a PSU with at least 400 Watts for the GeForce 9800 GT. The GeForce 9800 GT requires 75 Watts more than the R7 240 to run. The difference is significant enough that the GeForce 9800 GT may have an adverse affect on your yearly electricity bills in comparison to the R7 240.
Core Speed | 730 MHz | ![]() | vs | 600 MHz | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Boost Clock | 780 MHz | ![]() | vs | - | |
Architecture | GCN 1.1 Oland PRO | Tesla G92-270-A2 | |||
OC Potential | Good |
![]() |
vs | Fair | |
Driver Support | Great |
![]() | vs | Poor | |
Release Date | 08 Oct 2013 | ![]() | vs | 21 Jul 2008 | |
GPU Link | GD Link | GD Link | |||
Approved | ![]() | ![]() | |||
Comparison |
1366x768 | 6.4
|
vs | ![]() |
7.1
|
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1600x900 | 4.9
|
vs | ![]() |
5.4
|
|
1920x1080 | 3.1
|
vs | ![]() |
3.8
|
|
2560x1440 | 2.3
|
![]() |
vs | ![]() |
2.3
|
3840x2160 | 1.5
|
![]() |
vs | - |
Memory | 2048 MB | ![]() | vs | 512 MB | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Memory Speed | 900 MHz | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 900 MHz |
Memory Bus | 128 Bit | vs | ![]() | 256 Bit | |
Memory Type | DDR3 | vs | ![]() | GDDR3 | |
Memory Bandwidth | 28.8GB/sec | vs | ![]() | 57.6GB/sec | |
L2 Cache | 512 KB | ![]() |
vs | 0 KB | |
Delta Color Compression | no | vs | no | ||
Memory Performance | 0% | ![]() |
vs | ![]() |
0% |
Comparison |
Shader Processing Units | 320 | ![]() | vs | 112 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Actual Shader Performance | 10% | ![]() | vs | 8% | |
Technology | 28nm | ![]() | vs | 65nm | |
Texture Mapping Units | 20 | vs | ![]() | 56 | |
Texture Rate | 14.6 GTexel/s | vs | ![]() | 33.6 GTexel/s | |
Render Output Units | 8 | vs | ![]() | 16 | |
Pixel Rate | 5.8 GPixel/s | vs | ![]() | 9.6 GPixel/s | |
Comparison |
Max Digital Resolution (WxH) | 4096x2160 | ![]() | vs | 2560x1600 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
VGA Connections | 1 | ![]() | vs | 0 | |
DVI Connections | 1 | vs | ![]() | 2 | |
HDMI Connections | 1 | ![]() | vs | 0 | |
DisplayPort Connections | - | vs | - | ||
Comparison |
Max Power | 30 Watts | ![]() | vs | 105 Watts | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Recommended PSU | 400 Watts & 18 Amps | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 400 Watts & 29 Amps |
DirectX | 12.0 | ![]() | vs | 10.0 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Shader Model | 5.0 | ![]() | vs | 4.0 | |
Open GL | 4.4 | ![]() | vs | 3.3 | |
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 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Recommended RAM | 4 GB | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 4 GB |
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution | 1366x768 | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 1366x768 |
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. | Overview GeForce 9800 GT is a High-End Graphics Card based on the first revision of the Tesla Architecture. Architecture Tesla was NVIDIA's First Unified Shader Architecture. GPU It equips a GPU Codenamed G92-270-A2 which has 7 Stream Multiprocessors activated and thus offers 112 Shader Processing Units, 56 TMUs and 16 ROPs. The Central Unit is clocked at 600MHz. Memory The GPU accesses a 512MB frame buffer of GDDR3, through a 256-bit memory interface. The size of the frame buffer is adequate. The Memory Clock Operates at 900MHz. Features DirectX 10.0 Support (10.0 Hardware Default) and support for SLI, NVIDIA PureVideo HD Technology, Dual-stream Hardware Acceleration, PhysX, CUDA, HybridPower and other technologies. Cooling Solution The Cooling Solution consists of a Single-Fan. Power Consumption With a rated board TDP of 105W, it requires at least a 400W PSU and it requires at least one 6-pin available connectors. Performance GeForce 9800 GT is a direct re-brand of GeForce 8800 GT. Gaming benchmarks put its performance somewhat below a Radeon HD 4770, meaning it is much faster than Radeon HD 3870. |
---|