
Radeon R7 240 vs GRID M6-0B

Radeon R7 240
Popular choices:

GRID M6-0B
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 Radeon R7 240 is positioned at rank 103 and the GRID M6-0B is on rank 374, so the Radeon R7 240 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R7 240
Performance Per Dollar GRID M6-0B
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID M6-0B is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.1% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Radeon R7 240 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Radeon R7 240 | GRID M6-0B |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R7 240 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R7 240 holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $100), it costs 85% less, resulting in a 559.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R7 240 | GRID M6-0B |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+559.4%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($15) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($100) |
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 Radeon R7 240 and GRID M6-0B

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.

GRID M6-0B
The GRID M6-0B is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 722 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 912 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R7 240 scores 902 and the GRID M6-0B reaches 912 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R7 240 is built on GCN 1.0 while the GRID M6-0B uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 320 (Radeon R7 240) vs 1,536 (GRID M6-0B). Raw compute: 0.448 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 240) vs 2.218 TFLOPS (GRID M6-0B).
| Feature | Radeon R7 240 | GRID M6-0B |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 902 | 912+1% |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 320 | 1536+380% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.448 TFLOPS | 2.218 TFLOPS+395% |
| ROPs | 8 | 64+700% |
| TMUs | 20 | 96+380% |
| L1 Cache | 80 KB | 576 KB+620% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R7 240 | GRID M6-0B |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon R7 240 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GRID M6-0B has 512 MB. The Radeon R7 240 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Radeon R7 240) vs 2 MB (GRID M6-0B) — the GRID M6-0B has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R7 240 | GRID M6-0B |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB+300% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R7 240 draws 30W versus the GRID M6-0B's 100W — a 107.7% difference. The Radeon R7 240 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (Radeon R7 240) vs 350W (GRID M6-0B). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon R7 240 | GRID M6-0B |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W-70% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 1mm |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Perf/Watt | 30.1+231% | 9.1 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R7 240 launched at $69 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the GRID M6-0B launched at $1500 and now averages $100. The Radeon R7 240 costs 85% less ($85 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 60.1 (Radeon R7 240) vs 9.1 (GRID M6-0B) — the Radeon R7 240 offers 560.4% better value. The GRID M6-0B is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon R7 240 | GRID M6-0B |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $69-95% | $1500 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15-85% | $100 |
| Performance per Dollar | 60.1+560% | 9.1 |
| Codename | Oland | GM204 |
| Release | October 8 2013 | August 30 2015 |
| Ranking | #911 | #535 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















