Select any two GPUs for comparison

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Radeon R7 240 2GB GeForce 9600 GSO EVGA Dual-Slot 768MB Edition
Cyberpunk 2077 786% 1157%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 711% 1050%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 684% 1012%
Hitman 3 1053% 1535%
Grand Theft Auto VI 1147% 1669%
FIFA 21 347% 534%
Far Cry 6 1182% 1719%
Genshin Impact 786% 1157%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 1171% 1702%
Watch Dogs Legion 755% 1112%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the AMD Radeon R7 240 2GB are significantly better than the Nvidia GeForce 9600 GSO EVGA Dual-Slot 768MB Edition.

The R7 240 has a 180 MHz higher core clock speed than the 9600 GSO, but the 9600 GSO has 28 more Texture Mapping Units than the R7 240. As a result, the 9600 GSO exhibits a 11.8 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 180 MHz higher core clock speed than the 9600 GSO, but the 9600 GSO has 4 more Render Output Units than the R7 240. As a result, the 9600 GSO exhibits a 0.8 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 9600 GSO, 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 9600 GSO when running the latest games.

The R7 240 has 1280 MB more video memory than the 9600 GSO, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. However, the overall memory performance is about the same.

The 9600 GSO has 9.6 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the R7 240, which means that the memory performance of the 9600 GSO is marginally better than the R7 240.

The Radeon R7 240 2GB has 320 Shader Processing Units and the GeForce 9600 GSO EVGA Dual-Slot 768MB Edition has 96. However, the actual shader performance of the R7 240 is 212 and the actual shader performance of the 9600 GSO is 132. The R7 240 having 80 better shader performance is not particularly notable, as altogether the 9600 GSO performs better when taking into account other relevant data.

The R7 240 transistor size technology is 37 nm (nanometers) smaller than the 9600 GSO. This means that the R7 240 is expected to run much cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the 9600 GSO.

The Radeon R7 240 2GB requires 30 Watts to run and the GeForce 9600 GSO EVGA Dual-Slot 768MB Edition requires 84 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 9600 GSO. The 9600 GSO requires 54 Watts more than the R7 240 to run. The difference is significant enough that the 9600 GSO 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 MHzvs550 MHz
Boost Clock780 MHzvs-
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 Oland PROG92
OC Potential Good vs Poor
Driver Support Great vs -
Release Date08 Oct 2013vs01 May 2008
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link

Resolution Performance

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

GPU Memory

Memory2048 MBvs768 MB
Memory Speed900 MHzvs800 MHz
Memory Bus128 Bitvs192 Bit
Memory TypeDDR3vsGDDR3
Memory Bandwidth28.8GB/secvs38.4GB/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 Units320vs96
Actual Shader Performance10%vs6%
Texture Mapping Units20vs48
Texture Rate14.6 GTexel/svs26.4 GTexel/s
Render Output Units8vs12
Pixel Rate5.8 GPixel/svs6.6 GPixel/s

GPU Outputs

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

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power30 Wattsvs84 Watts
Recommended PSU400 Watts & 18 Ampsvs400 Watts & 26 Amps

GPU Features

Shader Model5.0vs4.0
Open GL4.4vs2.1
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUnono

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended ProcessorIntel Core i3-4130 3.4GHzvsIntel Core 2 Duo E6850 3.0GHz
Recommended RAM4 GBvs4 GB
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution1366x768vs1366x768

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.
GeForce 9600 GSO EVGA Dual-Slot 768MB Edition is a special edition of the middle-class GeForce 9600 GSO.
It offers twice as much video memory which will only offer a performance boost on superior resolutions which the card isn't very suited for from the begining. Nevertheless, expect an overall 7% performance boost over the reference 384MB card.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
GPU Variants