Recommended System Requirements | ||
---|---|---|
Game | Radeon R7 240 2GB | Quadro 4000 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 786% | 584% |
Hitman 3 | 1053% | 789% |
Assassins Creed: Valhalla | 711% | 525% |
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War | 684% | 505% |
FIFA 21 | 347% | 245% |
Grand Theft Auto VI | 1147% | 862% |
Far Cry 6 | 1182% | 889% |
Genshin Impact | 786% | 584% |
Battlefield 6 | 1053% | 789% |
Resident Evil 8 | 786% | 584% |
In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia Quadro 4000 are noticeably better than the AMD Radeon R7 240 2GB.
The R7 240 has a 255 MHz higher core clock speed than the Quadro 4000, but the Quadro 4000 has 12 more Texture Mapping Units than the R7 240. As a result, the Quadro 4000 exhibits a 0.6 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 255 MHz higher core clock speed than the Quadro 4000, but the Quadro 4000 has 24 more Render Output Units than the R7 240. As a result, the Quadro 4000 exhibits a 9.4 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 a year more recently than the Quadro 4000, 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 Quadro 4000.
The Radeon R7 240 2GB and the Quadro 4000 have the same amount of video memory, but are likely to provide slightly different experiences when displaying game textures at high resolutions.
The Quadro 4000 has 61.1 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the R7 240, which means that the memory performance of the Quadro 4000 is much better than the R7 240.
The Radeon R7 240 2GB has 320 Shader Processing Units and the Quadro 4000 has 256. However, the actual shader performance of the R7 240 is 212 and the actual shader performance of the Quadro 4000 is 243. The Quadro 4000 having 31 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the Quadro 4000 delivers a significantly 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 Quadro 4000. This means that the R7 240 is expected to run slightly cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the Quadro 4000.
The Radeon R7 240 2GB requires 30 Watts to run and the Quadro 4000 requires 142 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 400 Watts for the R7 240 and a PSU with at least 500 Watts for the Quadro 4000. The Quadro 4000 requires 112 Watts more than the R7 240 to run. The difference is significant enough that the Quadro 4000 may have an adverse affect on your yearly electricity bills in comparison to the R7 240.
Core Speed | 730 MHz | ![]() | vs | 475 MHz | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Boost Clock | 780 MHz | ![]() | vs | - | |
Architecture | GCN 1.1 Oland PRO | Fermi GF100-100-KD | |||
OC Potential | Good |
![]() |
vs |
![]() | Good |
Driver Support | Great |
![]() | vs | - | |
Release Date | 08 Oct 2013 | ![]() | vs | 02 Nov 2010 | |
GPU Link | GD Link | GD Link | |||
Approved | ![]() | ![]() | |||
Comparison |
1366x768 | 6.4
|
![]() |
vs | - | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1600x900 | 4.9
|
![]() |
vs | - | |
1920x1080 | 3.1
|
![]() |
vs | - | |
2560x1440 | 2.3
|
![]() |
vs | - | |
3840x2160 | 1.5
|
![]() |
vs | - |
Memory | 2048 MB | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 2048 MB |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Memory Speed | 900 MHz | ![]() | vs | 702 MHz | |
Memory Bus | 128 Bit | vs | ![]() | 256 Bit | |
Memory Type | DDR3 | vs | ![]() | GDDR5 | |
Memory Bandwidth | 28.8GB/sec | vs | ![]() | 89.9GB/sec | |
L2 Cache | 512 KB | ![]() |
vs | 384 KB | |
Delta Color Compression | no | vs | no | ||
Memory Performance | 0% | ![]() |
vs | ![]() |
0% |
Comparison |
Shader Processing Units | 320 | ![]() | vs | 256 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Actual Shader Performance | 10% | vs | ![]() | 12% | |
Technology | 28nm | ![]() | vs | 40nm | |
Texture Mapping Units | 20 | vs | ![]() | 32 | |
Texture Rate | 14.6 GTexel/s | vs | ![]() | 15.2 GTexel/s | |
Render Output Units | 8 | vs | ![]() | 32 | |
Pixel Rate | 5.8 GPixel/s | vs | ![]() | 15.2 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 | 142 Watts | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Recommended PSU | 400 Watts & 18 Amps | ![]() | vs | 500 Watts & 33 Amps |
DirectX | 12.0 | ![]() | vs | 11 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Shader Model | 5.0 | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 5.0 |
Open GL | 4.4 | ![]() | vs | 4.1 | |
Open CL | - | vs | - | ||
Notebook GPU | no | no | |||
SLI/Crossfire | no | vs | no | ||
Dedicated | yes | ![]() | vs | ![]() | yes |
Comparison |
Recommended Processor | Intel Core i3-4130 3.4GHz | ![]() | vs | Intel Core i5-760 2.8GHz | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Recommended RAM | 4 GB | ![]() | vs | 8 GB | |
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution | 1366x768 | vs | ![]() | 1920x1080 |
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. | Quadro 4000 is a middle-class professional card based on the 40nm, Fermi architecture. It's based on the Fermi GF100-100-KD GPU and thus offers 352 Shader Processing Units, 44 TMUs and 40 ROPs, on a 256-bit memory interface of fast GDDR5. The central unit runs at 450MHz and the memory clock operates at up to 702MHz. It has a L2 Cache of 384KB and a rated board TDP of 142 Watts. Despite exhibiting similarities to GeForce GTX 460, due to being under-clocked and because Quadro 4000's drivers are only certified for professional applications only, its gaming performance is up to 10% slower than GeForce GTS 450. |
---|