GeForce 240M GT vs GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT
GeForce 240M GT
Popular choices:
GeForce GT 120 / 9500 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 GeForce 240M GT is positioned at rank 575 and the GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT is on rank 266, so the GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT 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 GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.6% higher G3D Mark score. 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 | GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| 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 $15), it costs 67% less, resulting in a 195.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce 240M GT | GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+195.4%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($5) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($15) |
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 GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT
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.
GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT
The GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 26 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1506 MHz to 1709 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 120W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 325 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 240M GT scores 320 and the GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT reaches 325 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 240M GT is built on Maxwell while the GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 240M GT) vs 1,280 (GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT). Raw compute: 0.9032 TFLOPS (GeForce 240M GT) vs 4.375 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT). Boost clocks: 1176 MHz vs 1709 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 320 | 325+2% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 1280+233% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.9032 TFLOPS | 4.375 TFLOPS+384% |
| Boost Clock | 1176 MHz | 1709 MHz+45% |
| ROPs | 8 | 40+400% |
| TMUs | 24 | 80+233% |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 480 KB+150% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1.25 MB+25% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | GeForce GT 120 / 9500 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)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 240M GT) vs 1.25 MB (GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT) — the GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1.25 MB+25% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (GeForce 240M GT) vs 10.0 (GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce 240M GT) vs None (GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT). Decoder: PureVideo VP4 vs PureVideo VP2. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (GeForce 240M GT) vs MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT).
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo VP4 | PureVideo VP2 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 240M GT draws 33W versus the GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT's 120W — a 113.7% difference. The GeForce 240M GT is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 240M GT) vs 350W (GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT). Power connectors: Legacy vs None. Card length: 0mm vs 168mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 75.
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 33W-73% | 120W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | None |
| Length | 0mm | 168mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 75-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 9.7+259% | 2.7 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 240M GT launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $5, while the GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT launched at $85 and now averages $15. The GeForce 240M GT costs 66.7% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 64.0 (GeForce 240M GT) vs 21.7 (GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT) — the GeForce 240M GT offers 194.9% better value. The GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2015).
| Feature | GeForce 240M GT | GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100 | $85-15% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $5-67% | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 64.0+195% | 21.7 |
| Codename | GM108 | GP106 |
| Release | March 13 2015 | December 26 2017 |
| Ranking | #847 | #289 |
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 GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT
