FirePro V3800 vs GeForce 240M GT
FirePro V3800
Popular choices:
GeForce 240M GT
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FirePro V3800 is positioned at rank 268 and the GeForce 240M GT is on rank 575, so the FirePro V3800 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro V3800
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 240M GT
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro V3800 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.3% higher G3D Mark score and 700% more VRAM (4 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 240M GT.
| Insight | FirePro V3800 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+700%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 240M GT offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce 240M GT holds the technical lead. Priced at $5 (vs $12), it costs 58% less, resulting in a 139.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro V3800 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+139.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($12) | ✅More affordable ($5) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro V3800 and GeForce 240M GT
FirePro V3800
The FirePro V3800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 26 2010. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 690 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 74W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 321 points. Launch price was $479.
GeForce 240M GT
The GeForce 240M GT is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1072 MHz to 1176 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 320 points.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro V3800 scores 321 and the GeForce 240M GT reaches 320 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro V3800 is built on TeraScale 2 while the GeForce 240M GT uses Maxwell, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (FirePro V3800) vs 384 (GeForce 240M GT). Raw compute: 1.104 TFLOPS (FirePro V3800) vs 0.9032 TFLOPS (GeForce 240M GT).
| Feature | FirePro V3800 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 321 | 320 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 800+108% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.104 TFLOPS+22% | 0.9032 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 40+67% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 80 KB | 192 KB+140% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro V3800 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FirePro V3800 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce 240M GT has 512 MB. The FirePro V3800 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (FirePro V3800) vs 1 MB (GeForce 240M GT) — the GeForce 240M GT has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro V3800 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+700% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.2 (FirePro V3800) vs 10.1 (GeForce 240M GT). OpenGL: 4.4 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | FirePro V3800 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.2+11% | 10.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4+33% | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (FirePro V3800) vs None (GeForce 240M GT). Decoder: UVD 2.3 vs PureVideo VP4. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (FirePro V3800) vs MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (GeForce 240M GT).
| Feature | FirePro V3800 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | UVD 2.3 | PureVideo VP4 |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro V3800 draws 74W versus the GeForce 240M GT's 33W — a 76.6% difference. The GeForce 240M GT is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro V3800) vs 350W (GeForce 240M GT). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Card length: 168mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 80°C.
| Feature | FirePro V3800 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 74W | 33W-55% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 168mm | 0mm |
| Height | 69mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 80 | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 4.3 | 9.7+126% |
Value Analysis
The FirePro V3800 launched at $129 MSRP and currently averages $12, while the GeForce 240M GT launched at $100 and now averages $5. The GeForce 240M GT costs 58.3% less ($7 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 26.8 (FirePro V3800) vs 64.0 (GeForce 240M GT) — the GeForce 240M GT offers 138.8% better value. The GeForce 240M GT is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2010).
| Feature | FirePro V3800 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129 | $100-22% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $12 | $5-58% |
| Performance per Dollar | 26.8 | 64.0+139% |
| Codename | Juniper | GM108 |
| Release | April 26 2010 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #780 | #847 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FirePro V3800 and GeForce 240M GT
