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