NVIDIA’s GeForce GT 240: The Card That Doesn't Matter
by Ryan Smith on January 6, 2010 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Left 4 Dead
Valve’s venerable Source engine continues to roll on with Left 4 Dead, their co-op zombie shooter. As the Source engine is CPU limited, this is another title that low-end cards can do well at.
Left 4 Dead is a mixed bag for the GT 240. On the positive side, even with 4x AA it has no issue pulling off fluid framerates at 1680, and the gap between the DDR3 and GDDR5 cards is fairly muted. On the other hand it’s below parity with the 9600 GT at times, never mind the 8800 GT.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
55 Comments
View All Comments
BelardA - Wednesday, January 6, 2010 - link
Anyone notice any lack of SLI on these cards? Of course they are soooo slow.Okay, the ATI 4670 (DX 10.1) came out over a year ago with an MSRP of $90~100. Considering the age, its about the same wattage and noise as the GT240 and in many cases, its a slower card.
Why bother even making such a card? Other than the profit sold from a $90 GT240 is much better than a $90 9800GT.... except nobody in their right mind would bother with a GT240
If the GT240 was a $65~80 part, nobody would complain.
But what happens when ATI releases their $100 5600 series cards? Since the 5700s are pretty much on par with the 4800s. I'm not expecting the 5600s to be that exciting. Other than being $100 DX11 cards that are faster than 4670s but maybe around 4830 performance.
Penti - Wednesday, January 6, 2010 - link
OEMs, OEMs would.BelardA - Thursday, January 7, 2010 - link
Yeah yeah, I know. OEMS love such things.Kind of sick to look at ordering forms on sites like Dell. When a basic desktop has a default price... add something like a ATI 4670 or GT240 and the price goes up $150. Apple is the WORST with their quad-SLI setup with GT120 (I think) video cards... wow, 4 slow cards at about $150 a pop! While on the same Apple order form, a single $200 ATI 4870 is available and should be faster.
aegisofrime - Wednesday, January 6, 2010 - link
I might be nitpicking, but you have listed all the ASUS results as "nVidia Geforce GT 240" instead of "ASUS Geforce GT 240" in the charts. :pRyan Smith - Wednesday, January 6, 2010 - link
For the performance data, that is correct. Not to slight Asus of course, but their cards are stock cards. Hence they're the reference values I'm using for the GT 240, and are listed as such.aegisofrime - Wednesday, January 6, 2010 - link
Ah I see. Thanks for the clarification!lopri - Wednesday, January 6, 2010 - link
Thank you Ryan for this excellent review. It's refreshing to read a sensible piece without personal drama and baseless conspiracy theories.Devo2007 - Wednesday, January 6, 2010 - link
Might want to fix the power charts as they currently list an NVidia Geforce 4870 X2 card. Unless of course that is how they have decided to compete with ATI (rebranding Radeons). :)korbendallas - Wednesday, January 6, 2010 - link
The load temperature graph has to be wrong - there's no way two cards with the same cooler and the same power consumption has such a difference in temperature.korbendallas - Wednesday, January 6, 2010 - link
Oh, the fan is bugged out... nevermind :)