GRID K240Q vs Moore Threads MTT S80
GRID K240Q
Popular choices:
Moore Threads MTT S80
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. The GRID K240Q is positioned at rank #210 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID K240Q
Performance Per Dollar Moore Threads MTT S80
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GRID K240Q is significantly newer (2013 vs 0). The GRID K240Q likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Moore Threads MTT S80 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID K240Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Moore Threads MTT S80.
| Insight | GRID K240Q | Moore Threads MTT S80 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | MUSA (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (285mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The GRID K240Q offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $40 versus $170 for the Moore Threads MTT S80, it costs 76% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 329.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID K240Q | Moore Threads MTT S80 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+329.7%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($40) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($170) |
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 GRID K240Q and Moore Threads MTT S80
GRID K240Q
The GRID K240Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 28 2013. 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: 2,541 points. Launch price was $469.
Moore Threads MTT S80
The Moore Threads MTT S80 is manufactured by an unknown manufacturer. It was released in sem dados. It features the MUSA architecture. The core clock speed is 1800 MHz. It has 4096 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 255W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,513 points.
Graphics Performance
The GRID K240Q scores 2,541 and the Moore Threads MTT S80 reaches 2,513 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID K240Q is built on Kepler while the Moore Threads MTT S80 uses MUSA, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID K240Q) vs 4,096 (Moore Threads MTT S80). Raw compute: 2.289 TFLOPS (GRID K240Q) vs 14.75 TFLOPS (Moore Threads MTT S80).
| Feature | GRID K240Q | Moore Threads MTT S80 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,541+1% | 2,513 |
| Architecture | Kepler | MUSA |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536 | 4096+167% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.289 TFLOPS | 14.75 TFLOPS+544% |
| ROPs | 32 | 256+700% |
| TMUs | 128 | 256+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 4 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID K240Q | Moore Threads MTT S80 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (GRID K240Q) vs 4 MB (Moore Threads MTT S80) — the Moore Threads MTT S80 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID K240Q | Moore Threads MTT S80 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 4 MB+700% |
Display & API Support
Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | GRID K240Q | Moore Threads MTT S80 |
|---|---|---|
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GRID K240Q) vs H.264,H.265,AV1,VP9 (Moore Threads MTT S80).
| Feature | GRID K240Q | Moore Threads MTT S80 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | — | MUSA Gen2 |
| Decoder | — | MUSA Gen2 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | H.264,H.265,AV1,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID K240Q draws 225W versus the Moore Threads MTT S80's 255W — a 12.5% difference. The GRID K240Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID K240Q) vs 550W (Moore Threads MTT S80). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 8-pin. Card length: 1mm vs 285mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | GRID K240Q | Moore Threads MTT S80 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W-12% | 255W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-36% | 550W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 8-pin |
| Length | 1mm | 285mm |
| Height | — | 112mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 11.3+14% | 9.9 |
Value Analysis
The GRID K240Q launched at $500 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the Moore Threads MTT S80 launched at $260 and now averages $170. The GRID K240Q costs 76.5% less ($130 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 63.5 (GRID K240Q) vs 14.8 (Moore Threads MTT S80) — the GRID K240Q offers 329.1% better value.
| Feature | GRID K240Q | Moore Threads MTT S80 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $500 | $260-48% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40-76% | $170 |
| Performance per Dollar | 63.5+329% | 14.8 |
| Codename | GK104 | Chunxiao |
| Release | June 28 2013 | sem dados |
| Ranking | #628 | #635 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GRID K240Q and Moore Threads MTT S80
