
Radeon 3000 vs GeForce 240M GT

Radeon 3000
Popular choices:

GeForce 240M GT
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 240M GT
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon 3000 uses modern memory architecture. The Radeon 3000 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 240M GT lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 240M GT is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 226.5% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon 3000.
| Insight | Radeon 3000 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-226.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+226.5%) |
| Longevity | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) (14nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 240M GT offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $5 versus $49 for the Radeon 3000, it costs 90% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 3100% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon 3000 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+3100%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49) | ✅More affordable ($5) |
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 3000 and GeForce 240M GT

Radeon 3000
The Radeon 3000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 13 2019. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1082 MHz to 1218 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 98 points.

GeForce 240M GT
The GeForce 240M GT is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1072 MHz to 1176 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 320 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Radeon 3000 scores 98 versus the GeForce 240M GT's 320 — the GeForce 240M GT leads by 226.5%. The Radeon 3000 is built on GCN 4.0 while the GeForce 240M GT uses Maxwell, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 512 (Radeon 3000) vs 384 (GeForce 240M GT). Raw compute: 1.247 TFLOPS (Radeon 3000) vs 0.9032 TFLOPS (GeForce 240M GT). Boost clocks: 1218 MHz vs 1176 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon 3000 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 98 | 320+227% |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 512+33% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.247 TFLOPS+38% | 0.9032 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1218 MHz+4% | 1176 MHz |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 32+33% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 192 KB+50% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon 3000 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (Radeon 3000) vs 1 MB (GeForce 240M GT) — the GeForce 240M GT has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon 3000 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10_0 (Radeon 3000) vs 10.1 (GeForce 240M GT). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon 3000 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10_0 | 10.1 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Avivo HD (Radeon 3000) vs None (GeForce 240M GT). Decoder: Avivo HD vs PureVideo VP4.
| Feature | Radeon 3000 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Avivo HD | None |
| Decoder | Avivo HD | PureVideo VP4 |
| Codecs | — | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon 3000 draws 50W versus the GeForce 240M GT's 33W — a 41% difference. The GeForce 240M GT is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon 3000) vs 350W (GeForce 240M GT). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Card length: 1mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | Radeon 3000 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W | 33W-34% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 1mm | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 2.0 | 9.7+385% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon 3000 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the GeForce 240M GT launched at $100 and now averages $5. The GeForce 240M GT costs 89.8% less ($44 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 2.0 (Radeon 3000) vs 64.0 (GeForce 240M GT) — the GeForce 240M GT offers 3100% better value. The Radeon 3000 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).
| Feature | Radeon 3000 | GeForce 240M GT |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0-100% | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49 | $5-90% |
| Performance per Dollar | 2.0 | 64.0+3100% |
| Codename | Polaris 23 | GM108 |
| Release | May 13 2019 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #757 | #847 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















