
GeForce GT 720A vs Radeon R5 A240

GeForce GT 720A
Popular choices:

Radeon R5 A240
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 720A is positioned at rank 314 and the Radeon R5 A240 is on rank 206, so the Radeon R5 A240 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 720A
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R5 A240
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R5 A240 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 GT 720A.
| Insight | GeForce GT 720A | Radeon R5 A240 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R5 A240 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R5 A240 holds the technical lead. Priced at $10 (vs $40), it costs 75% less, resulting in a 306.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GT 720A | Radeon R5 A240 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+306.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($40) | ✅More affordable ($10) |
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 720A and Radeon R5 A240

GeForce GT 720A
The GeForce GT 720A is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 17 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 628 MHz to 657 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 567 points.

Radeon R5 A240
The Radeon R5 A240 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 8 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 780 MHz. It has 320 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 576 points. Launch price was $69.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GT 720A scores 567 and the Radeon R5 A240 reaches 576 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GT 720A is built on Kepler while the Radeon R5 A240 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GT 720A) vs 320 (Radeon R5 A240). Raw compute: 1.009 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 720A) vs 0.448 TFLOPS (Radeon R5 A240). Boost clocks: 657 MHz vs 780 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GT 720A | Radeon R5 A240 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 567 | 576+2% |
| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768+140% | 320 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.009 TFLOPS+125% | 0.448 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 657 MHz | 780 MHz+19% |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 64+220% | 20 |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 80 KB+25% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GT 720A | Radeon R5 A240 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GT 720A | Radeon R5 A240 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GT 720A draws 55W versus the Radeon R5 A240's 30W — a 58.8% difference. The Radeon R5 A240 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GT 720A) vs 350W (Radeon R5 A240). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None.
| Feature | GeForce GT 720A | Radeon R5 A240 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 55W | 30W-45% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 10.3 | 19.2+86% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GT 720A launched at $40 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the Radeon R5 A240 launched at $100 and now averages $10. The Radeon R5 A240 costs 75% less ($30 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 14.2 (GeForce GT 720A) vs 57.6 (Radeon R5 A240) — the Radeon R5 A240 offers 305.6% better value. The GeForce GT 720A is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2013).
| Feature | GeForce GT 720A | Radeon R5 A240 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $40-60% | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40 | $10-75% |
| Performance per Dollar | 14.2 | 57.6+306% |
| Codename | GK106 | Oland |
| Release | March 17 2014 | October 8 2013 |
| Ranking | #813 | #911 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











