Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game GeForce GTS 450 v4 Asus 1GB Edition Radeon R7 240 2GB
Cyberpunk 2077 737% 786%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 666% 711%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 641% 684%
Hitman 3 989% 1053%
Grand Theft Auto VI 1078% 1147%
FIFA 21 322% 347%
Far Cry 6 1111% 1182%
Genshin Impact 737% 786%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 1100% 1171%
Watch Dogs Legion 707% 755%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia GeForce GTS 450 v4 Asus 1GB Edition are very slightly better than the AMD Radeon R7 240 2GB.

The R7 240 has a 136 MHz higher core clock speed but 4 fewer Texture Mapping Units than the GTS 450. The lower TMU count doesn't matter, though, as altogether the R7 240 manages to provide 0.3 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 R7 240 has a 136 MHz higher core clock speed than the GTS 450, but the GTS 450 has 8 more Render Output Units than the R7 240. As a result, the GTS 450 exhibits a 3.7 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 GTS 450, 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 GTS 450.

The R7 240 has 1024 MB more video memory than the GTS 450, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. This is supported by the fact that the R7 240 also has superior memory performance overall.

The R7 240 has 3.2 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the GTS 450, which means that the memory performance of the R7 240 is marginally better than the GTS 450.

The GeForce GTS 450 v4 Asus 1GB Edition has 144 Shader Processing Units and the Radeon R7 240 2GB has 320. However, the actual shader performance of the GTS 450 is 171 and the actual shader performance of the R7 240 is 212. The R7 240 having 41 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the R7 240 delivers a marginally smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the GTS 450.

The R7 240 transistor size technology is 12 nm (nanometers) smaller than the GTS 450. This means that the R7 240 is expected to run slightly cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the GTS 450. While they exhibit similar graphical performance, the R7 240 should consume less power than the GTS 450.

The GeForce GTS 450 v4 Asus 1GB Edition requires 75 Watts to run and the Radeon R7 240 2GB requires 30 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 350 Watts for the GTS 450 and a PSU with at least 400 Watts for the R7 240. The GTS 450 requires 45 Watts more than the R7 240 to run. The difference is significant enough that the GTS 450 may have a slight adverse affect on your yearly electricity bills in comparison to the R7 240.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed594 MHzvs730 MHz
Boost Clock-vs780 MHz
ArchitectureFermi GF106-250-KA-A1GCN 1.1 Oland PRO
OC Potential Good vs Good
Driver Support Poor vs Great
Release Date11 Jul 2012vs08 Oct 2013
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

Resolution Performance

1366x768 - vs green tick
6.4
1600x900
5
green tick vs
4.9
1920x1080
3.3
green tick vs
3.1
2560x1440
2.3
green tick vs green tick
2.3
3840x2160 - vs green tick
1.5

GPU Memory

Memory1024 MBvs2048 MB
Memory Speed800 MHzvs900 MHz
Memory Bus128 Bitvs128 Bit
Memory TypeDDR3vsDDR3
Memory Bandwidth25.6GB/secvs28.8GB/sec
L2 Cache 256 KB vs green tick 512 KB
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units144vs320
Actual Shader Performance8%vs10%
Technology40nmvs28nm
Texture Mapping Units24vs20
Texture Rate14.3 GTexel/svs14.6 GTexel/s
Render Output Units16vs8
Pixel Rate9.5 GPixel/svs5.8 GPixel/s
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)2560x1600vs4096x2160
VGA Connections1vs1
DVI Connections1vs1
HDMI Connections1vs1
DisplayPort Connections-vs-
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power75 Wattsvs30 Watts
Recommended PSU350 Watts & 26 Ampsvs400 Watts & 18 Amps

GPU Features

DirectX12.0vs12.0
Shader Model5.0vs5.0
Open GL4.5vs4.4
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUnono
SLI/Crossfireyesvsno
Dedicatedyesvsyes
Comparison

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended ProcessorIntel Core i3-3220 3.3GHzvsIntel Core i3-4130 3.4GHz
Recommended RAM4 GBvs4 GB
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution1366x768vs1366x768

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewOverview
GeForce GTS 450 v4 Asus 1GB Edition is a special edition of NVIDIA's fast-middle-class GeForce GTS 450 v4, created by Asus.

Overclock Out of The Box
The Central unit is actually underclocked reducing the power consumption and thus reducing the heat produced. Also, the Graphics Card relies entirely on the PCI Slot for power, meaning no extra connectors are required.

Cooling Solution
The Cooling System was replaced by Asus's Dust Proof Fan, meaning the card runs cooler under load.

Performance
Because of being underclocked, GGeForce GTS 450 v4 Asus 1GB Edition is actually slower than the reference GeForce GTS 450 v4.
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.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
-
GPU Variants
-