GRID K220Q vs Radeon R7 240

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.

GRID K220Q vs Radeon R7 240 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GRID K220Q vs Radeon R7 240: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GRID K220Q

2014

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 2 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2014 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
579.7% HIGHER MSRP
$469 MSRPvs$69 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 1.9 vs 13.1 G3D/$ ($469 MSRP vs $69 MSRP).
❌650% higher power demand at 225W vs 30W.

Radeon R7 240

2013

Why buy it

✅Costs $400 less on MSRP ($69 MSRP vs $469 MSRP).
✅Delivers 572.3% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 13.1 vs 1.9 G3D/$ ($69 MSRP vs $469 MSRP).
✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (2 GB vs 512 MB).
✅Draws 30W instead of 225W, a 195W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌2013 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GRID K220Q is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 1.1% in PassMark G3D (912 vs 902), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GRID K220Q is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a newer 2014 generation instead of 2013. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon R7 240 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $400 cheaper on MSRP at $69 vs $469, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 572.3% (13.1 vs 1.9), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Radeon R7 240 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, GRID K220Q has the stronger long-term case.

GRID K220Q vs Radeon R7 240 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GRID K220Q

The GRID K220Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 2 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 912 points. Launch price was $469.

Radeon R7 240

The Radeon R7 240 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: 902 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GRID K220Q scores 912 and the Radeon R7 240 reaches 902 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID K220Q is built on Kepler while the Radeon R7 240 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID K220Q) vs 320 (Radeon R7 240). Raw compute: 2.289 TFLOPS (GRID K220Q) vs 0.448 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 240).

Feature	GRID K220Q	Radeon R7 240
G3D Mark Score	912+1%	902
Architecture	Kepler	GCN 1.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1536+380%	320
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.289 TFLOPS+411%	0.448 TFLOPS
ROPs	32+300%	8
TMUs	128+540%	20
L1 Cache	128 KB+60%	80 KB
L2 Cache	512 KB+100%	256 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GRID K220Q	Radeon R7 240
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GRID K220Q has 512 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon R7 240 carries 2 GB. Radeon R7 240 gives you 300% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the GRID K220Q and 128-bit on the Radeon R7 240. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GRID K220Q) vs 256 KB (Radeon R7 240) — the GRID K220Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GRID K220Q	Radeon R7 240
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	2 GB+300%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	512 KB+100%	256 KB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GRID K220Q draws 225W versus the Radeon R7 240's 30W — a 152.9% difference. The Radeon R7 240 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID K220Q) vs 300W (Radeon R7 240). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None.

Feature	GRID K220Q	Radeon R7 240
TDP	225W	30W-87%
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	None
Length	265mm	—
Slots	2	—
Perf/Watt	4.1	30.1+634%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GRID K220Q came in at $469, while the Radeon R7 240 launched at $69. On MSRP, Radeon R7 240 was 85.3% cheaper ($400 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 1.9 (GRID K220Q) vs 13.1 (Radeon R7 240) — the Radeon R7 240 offers 589.5% better value. The newer card here is GRID K220Q (2014 vs 2013).

Feature	GRID K220Q	Radeon R7 240
MSRP	$469	$69-85%
Performance per Dollar	1.9	13.1+589%
Codename	GK104	Oland
Release	July 2 2014	October 8 2013
Ranking	#907	#911

Search GRID K220Q on Amazon

Search Radeon R7 240 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.