GeForce GT 230M
VS
GeForce GT 240M

GeForce GT 230M vs GeForce GT 240M

NVIDIA

GeForce GT 230M

2017Core: 1228 MHzBoost: 1468 MHz
VS
NVIDIA

GeForce GT 240M

2012Core: Up to 625 MHzBoost: 645 MHz

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 230M is positioned at rank 95 and the GeForce GT 240M is on rank 392, so the GeForce GT 230M 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 GT 230M

#1
GeForce RTX 3060 Ti
MSRP: $399|Avg: $280
504%
#2
GeForce RTX 5060
MSRP: $299|Avg: $299
484%
#3
Radeon RX 5600 XT
MSRP: $279|Avg: $180
478%
#4
Radeon RX 9060
MSRP: $249|Avg: $249
478%
#5
GeForce RTX 5050
MSRP: $249|Avg: $249
477%
#6
GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
MSRP: $249|Avg: $150
474%
#7
Arc A580
MSRP: $179|Avg: $179
468%
#8
Radeon RX 9060 XT
MSRP: $299|Avg: $299
466%
#9
Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB
MSRP: $299|Avg: $299
462%
#10
Radeon RX 7600
MSRP: $269|Avg: $250
461%
#11
Radeon RX 6600
MSRP: $329|Avg: $180
455%
#12
GeForce RTX 4060
MSRP: $299|Avg: $299
454%
#13
Arc B570
MSRP: $219|Avg: $219
446%
#14
Arc B580
MSRP: $249|Avg: $249
446%
#79
Radeon R5 430 OEM
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13
556%
#80
GeForce RTX 5090
MSRP: $1999|Avg: $2700
100%
#81
Moore Threads MTT S80
MSRP: $260|Avg: $170
96%
#82
Intel UHD Graphics P750
MSRP: $150|Avg: $100
86%
#83
Radeon Ryzen 7 4700G
MSRP: $299|Avg: $100
85%
#95
GeForce GT 230M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#96
Radeon R7 A8-7690K
MSRP: $80|Avg: $40
99%
#97
GeForce GT 1010
MSRP: $70|Avg: $70
96%
#98
Radeon R7 430
MSRP: $79|Avg: $15
96%
#100
Radeon 550X
MSRP: $109|Avg: $45
94%
#101
GeForce GT 720
MSRP: $49|Avg: $49
93%
#102
Radeon R7 240
MSRP: $69|Avg: $15
91%
#103
Radeon R7 G
MSRP: $69|Avg: $51
88%
#106
Radeon R7 250
MSRP: $89|Avg: $25
82%
#107
GeForce GT 640
MSRP: $99|Avg: $50
82%
#108
GeForce GT 640 Rev. 2
MSRP: $99|Avg: $99
82%
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
1161%
#385
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
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 230M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GT 240M.

InsightGeForce GT 230MGeForce GT 240M
Performance
Leading raw performance (+1.9%)
Lower raw frame rates (-1.9%)
Longevity
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021))
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018))
Ecosystem
Supports FSR Upscaling
Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM
❌ Less VRAM capacity
✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency
Normal Efficiency
Normal Efficiency
Case Fit

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GT 230M 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.

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GT 230M and GeForce GT 240M

NVIDIA

GeForce GT 230M

The GeForce GT 230M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1228 MHz to 1468 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 216 points. Launch price was $79.

NVIDIA

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 GT 230M scores 216 and the GeForce GT 240M reaches 212 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GT 230M is built on Pascal while the GeForce GT 240M uses Kepler, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GT 230M) vs 384 (GeForce GT 240M). Raw compute: 1.127 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 230M) vs 0.48 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 240M). Boost clocks: 1468 MHz vs 645 MHz.

FeatureGeForce GT 230MGeForce GT 240M
G3D Mark Score
216+2%
212
Architecture
Pascal
Kepler
Process Node
14 nm
28 nm
Shading Units
384
384
Compute (TFLOPS)
1.127 TFLOPS+135%
0.48 TFLOPS
Boost Clock
1468 MHz+128%
645 MHz
ROPs
16
16
TMUs
24
32+33%
L1 Cache
144 KB+350%
32 KB
L2 Cache
512 KB+100%
256 KB

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureGeForce GT 230MGeForce 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)

Both cards feature 1 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce GT 230M) vs 256 KB (GeForce GT 240M) — the GeForce GT 230M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureGeForce GT 230MGeForce GT 240M
VRAM Capacity
1 GB
1 GB
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth
Unknown
Unknown
Bus Width
64-bit
128-bit+100%
L2 Cache
512 KB+100%
256 KB
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 10.1 (GeForce GT 230M) vs 11.1 (10_1) (GeForce GT 240M). Vulkan: None vs N/A. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 0.

FeatureGeForce GT 230MGeForce GT 240M
DirectX
10.1
11.1 (10_1)+10%
Vulkan
None
N/A
OpenGL
3.3
3.3
Max Displays
1
0
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: No (GeForce GT 230M) vs None (GeForce GT 240M). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP4 vs PureVideo HD (VP4). Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 ASP (GeForce GT 230M) vs MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,MPEG-4 (GeForce GT 240M).

FeatureGeForce GT 230MGeForce GT 240M
Encoder
No
None
Decoder
PureVideo HD VP4
PureVideo HD (VP4)
Codecs
MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 ASP
MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,MPEG-4
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GT 230M draws 30W versus the GeForce GT 240M's 32W — a 6.5% difference. The GeForce GT 230M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GT 230M) vs 350W (GeForce GT 240M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 70.

FeatureGeForce GT 230MGeForce GT 240M
TDP
30W-6%
32W
Recommended PSU
350W
350W
Power Connector
PCIe-powered
PCIe-powered
Length
0mm
0mm
Height
0mm
0mm
Slots
0
0
Temp (Load)
75°C
70-7%
Perf/Watt
7.2+9%
6.6