GeForce 240M GT vs FirePro V3800
GeForce 240M GT
Popular choices:
FirePro V3800
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 GeForce 240M GT is positioned at rank 575 and the FirePro V3800 is on rank 268, 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 GeForce 240M GT
Performance Per Dollar FirePro V3800
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 | GeForce 240M GT | FirePro V3800 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+700%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| 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 | GeForce 240M GT | FirePro V3800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+139.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($5) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($12) |
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 GeForce 240M GT and FirePro V3800
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.
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.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 240M GT scores 320 and the FirePro V3800 reaches 321 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 240M GT is built on Maxwell while the FirePro V3800 uses TeraScale 2, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 240M GT) vs 800 (FirePro V3800). Raw compute: 0.9032 TFLOPS (GeForce 240M GT) vs 1.104 TFLOPS (FirePro V3800).
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | FirePro V3800 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 320 | 321 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | TeraScale 2 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 800+108% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.9032 TFLOPS | 1.104 TFLOPS+22% |
| ROPs | 8 | 16+100% |
| TMUs | 24 | 40+67% |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB+140% | 80 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | FirePro V3800 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 GeForce 240M GT comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the FirePro V3800 has 4 GB. The FirePro V3800 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 240M GT) vs 0.25 MB (FirePro V3800) — the GeForce 240M GT has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | FirePro V3800 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 4 GB+700% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (GeForce 240M GT) vs 11.2 (FirePro V3800). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.4. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | FirePro V3800 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 11.2+11% |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.4+33% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce 240M GT) vs None (FirePro V3800). Decoder: PureVideo VP4 vs UVD 2.3. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (GeForce 240M GT) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (FirePro V3800).
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | FirePro V3800 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo VP4 | UVD 2.3 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 240M GT draws 33W versus the FirePro V3800's 74W — a 76.6% difference. The GeForce 240M GT is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 240M GT) vs 350W (FirePro V3800). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 168mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80.
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | FirePro V3800 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 33W-55% | 74W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 168mm |
| Height | 0mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 9.7+126% | 4.3 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 240M GT launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $5, while the FirePro V3800 launched at $129 and now averages $12. The GeForce 240M GT costs 58.3% less ($7 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 64.0 (GeForce 240M GT) vs 26.8 (FirePro V3800) — the GeForce 240M GT offers 138.8% better value. The GeForce 240M GT is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2010).
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | FirePro V3800 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-22% | $129 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $5-58% | $12 |
| Performance per Dollar | 64.0+139% | 26.8 |
| Codename | GM108 | Juniper |
| Release | March 13 2015 | April 26 2010 |
| Ranking | #847 | #780 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 240M GT and FirePro V3800
