GeForce Go 7600 GT vs GeForce GT 240M

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 Go 7600 GT is positioned at rank 331 and the GeForce GT 240M is on rank 392, so the GeForce Go 7600 GT offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce Go 7600 GT

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

6843%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

6575%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

6498%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

6487%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

6474%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

6437%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

6356%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

6332%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

6274%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

6257%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

6181%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

6168%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

6057%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

6053%

#316

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

7547%

#331

GeForce Go 7600 GT

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#334

Radeon X1650 Pro

MSRP: $100|Avg: $15

80%

#336

RADEON X550

MSRP: $60|Avg: $10

80%

#337

Radeon HD 8350

MSRP: $200|Avg: $39

77%

#339

Radeon X1950 GT

MSRP: $140|Avg: $49

72%

#340

GeForce 6600 GT

MSRP: $199|Avg: $50

68%

#341

RADEON X600 PRO

MSRP: $99|Avg: $10

64%

#342

Radeon X1600 Pro

MSRP: $149|Avg: $49

62%

#343

RADEON X300SE

MSRP: $60|Avg: $60

59%

#345

RADEON X800 GTO

MSRP: $199|Avg: $199

55%

#346

Radeon X1600 XT

MSRP: $199|Avg: $15

55%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 240M

#382

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

1280%

#384

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

1161%

#385

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

1158%

#389

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

1053%

#390

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

1045%

#392

GeForce GT 240M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#393

Radeon R9 M485X

MSRP: $450|Avg: $150

100%

#394

Radeon HD 8570D + HD 6670 Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $100

99%

#395

Radeon HD 6650A

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

99%

#396

GeForce 920A

MSRP: $100|Avg: $15

98%

#397

GeForce 930A

MSRP: $150|Avg: $20

98%

#398

Mobility Radeon HD 4650

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

96%

#400

Radeon R9 M290X

MSRP: $400|Avg: $60

95%

#401

Radeon HD 7670

MSRP: $100|Avg: $25

95%

#402

Radeon HD 8550G + 8750M Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

94%

#403

Mobility Radeon HD 5000

MSRP: $99|Avg: $20

92%

#404

Iris Pro Graphics 5200

MSRP: $150|Avg: $40

92%

#406

Radeon RX Vega 10 Ryzen 7 3700C

MSRP: $150|Avg: $50

92%

#407

Radeon HD 8650G + 7700M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $30

89%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GT 240M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (1 GB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce Go 7600 GT.

Insight	GeForce Go 7600 GT	GeForce GT 240M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1%)	✅Leading raw performance (+1%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+300%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GT 240M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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.

GeForce Go 7600 GT Benchmark Check

GeForce GT 240M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce Go 7600 GT and GeForce GT 240M

GeForce Go 7600 GT

The GeForce Go 7600 GT is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 25 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 980 MHz to 1033 MHz. It has 1152 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 170W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 210 points. Launch price was $249.

GeForce GT 240M

The GeForce GT 240M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 22 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from Up to 625 MHz to 645 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 32W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 212 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce Go 7600 GT scores 210 and the GeForce GT 240M reaches 212 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce Go 7600 GT is built on Kepler while the GeForce GT 240M uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,152 (GeForce Go 7600 GT) vs 384 (GeForce GT 240M). Raw compute: 2.378 TFLOPS (GeForce Go 7600 GT) vs 0.48 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 240M). Boost clocks: 1033 MHz vs 645 MHz.

Feature	GeForce Go 7600 GT	GeForce GT 240M
G3D Mark Score	210	212
Architecture	Kepler	Kepler
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1152+200%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.378 TFLOPS+395%	0.48 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1033 MHz+60%	645 MHz
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	96+200%	32
L1 Cache	96 KB+200%	32 KB
L2 Cache	512 KB+100%	256 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce Go 7600 GT	GeForce GT 240M
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 Go 7600 GT comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GT 240M has 1 GB. The GeForce GT 240M offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce Go 7600 GT) vs 256 KB (GeForce GT 240M) — the GeForce Go 7600 GT has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce Go 7600 GT	GeForce GT 240M
VRAM Capacity	0.25 GB	1 GB+300%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	512 KB+100%	256 KB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 9.0c (GeForce Go 7600 GT) vs 11.1 (10_1) (GeForce GT 240M). Vulkan: N/A vs N/A. OpenGL: 2.1 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 0.

Feature	GeForce Go 7600 GT	GeForce GT 240M
DirectX	9.0c	11.1 (10_1)+23%
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
OpenGL	2.1	3.3+57%
Max Displays	2	0

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: PureVideo (GeForce Go 7600 GT) vs None (GeForce GT 240M). Decoder: PureVideo vs PureVideo HD (VP4). Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2 (GeForce Go 7600 GT) vs MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,MPEG-4 (GeForce GT 240M).

Feature	GeForce Go 7600 GT	GeForce GT 240M
Encoder	PureVideo	None
Decoder	PureVideo	PureVideo HD (VP4)
Codecs	H.264,MPEG-2	MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,MPEG-4

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce Go 7600 GT draws 170W versus the GeForce GT 240M's 32W — a 136.6% difference. The GeForce GT 240M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce Go 7600 GT) vs 350W (GeForce GT 240M). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 70.