GeForce GT 240: Low Power, High Performance, Sub-$100

[cleeve]

While the GeForce G 210 and GT 220 lacked inspiring performance, this newest model boasts enough of a punch to make us sit up and take notice. We have a detailed look at the first Nvidia graphics card to be paired with GDDR5 memory, its GeForce GT 240.

GeForce GT 240: Low Power, High Performance, Sub-$100 : Read more

 

[DeadCat]

awesome for an HTPC!!

 

[rodney_ws]

Well, it appears I might be the first poster... and that's pretty indicative of how exciting this card truly is. At any price point it's just hard to get excited when a company is just re-badging/re-naming older cards. DDR5? Oh yay! Now about that 128 bit bus...

 

[Ramar]

I really can't justify this card when a Sparkle 9800GT is on newegg for the same price or less than these cards. Perhaps if energy costs are really important to you?

 

[Uncle Meat]

Before we get into the game results, something we want to stress is that all of the GeForce cards we used for benchmarking ended up being factory overclocked models, but that our Diamond Radeon HD 4670 sample is clocked at reference speeds.

The memory on the Diamond Radeon HD 4670 is clocked 200Mhz below reference speeds.

 

[rodney_ws]

Also, the 9600 GSO was on the Egg for $35 after MIR a few weeks/months back. No, that's not a top-tier card, but at $35 that's practically an impulse buy.

 

[Guest]

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

Looking at what cards people actually have (8800gt mostly), I think there are very few that would want to upgrade to this. Give us something better, Nvidia! The only reason why Ati doesn't have a 90% market share right now is that they can't make 5800s and 5700s fast enough.

 

[jonpaul37]

the card is pointless, it's Nvidia's attempt to get some $$$ before an EP!C FA!L launch of Fermi

 

[jonpaul37]

The card is pointless, it's Nvidia's attempt to get some $$$ before an EP!C FA!L launch of Fermi.

 

[JofaMang]

No SLI means they want to force higher profit purchases from those looking for cheap multi-card setups. That's dirty. I wonder how two 4670s compare to one of these for the damn near the same price?

 

[KT_WASP]

I too noticed the discrepancy in your stated numbers for the Diamond 4670. In the article it states 750MHz / 800MHz (1600 effective). But then in your chart it states 750MHz / 1000MHz (2000 effective).

So, which one was used? Reference is 750/1000 (2000 eff.) Diamond had two versions, I believe, one at the reference speed and one at 750/900 (1800 eff.)

Just trying to understand you pick so we could better understand the results.

 

[hundredislandsboy]

No idea what Nvidia is thinking with the the release of this card sine a new 9800 GT is $89. They either have to drop the price of these GT240s to below $70 soon or it'll be huge loss. But maybe not. The only reason I an think of as to why Nvidia made this card is they had a bunch of spare parts lying around and rather than junk them, try to squeeze out some pennies. But then again ATI is playing the same game so if you can't beat them, join them!

 

[Aircraft123]

This card is nice but the price just is not right. For the same price you could get a 9800GT or save $20 (at least) and get a 4670

From the benchmarks the change in performance isn't worth that large ramp up in price.

BTW I have a 4650 going in my HTPC
and 2 XFX4890s in my desktop/gaming computer

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]rodney_ws[/nom] At any price point it's just hard to get excited when a company is just re-badging/re-naming older cards. [/citation]

The GT 240 isn't a rebadge, it's a new GPU based on the same architecture as the GTX 200 series.

 

[nforce4max]

These cards are a waste of money. A used 9600gt/gso can be had for less. Even my 8800gtx cost me less and I am using it now. Even my vintage 7900gtx duo (early gx2) holds its own.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]Uncle Meat[/nom]The memory on the Diamond Radeon HD 4670 is clocked 200Mhz below reference speeds.[/citation]

Absolutely right, fixed!

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]Aircraft123[/nom]From the benchmarks the change in performance isn't worth that large ramp up in price. [/citation]

I totally agree with you, however launch pricing is always high.

Remember, we don't get to see the actual launch pricing until you do. The article was written before the GT 240 was for sale, and we were told it was a sub-$100 card.

The reason I've been positive about this card is that production costs should be low enough for Nvidia to compete on price very quickly. For example, look at the GeForce GT 220: $80 at launch a couple weeks ago, it's already down to the low $60 range.

You'll need to use common sense. At $110, the Radeon 4850 is the obvious winner, and at $90 the 8800 GT is the way to go.

But pricing should fall into place with the DDR3 GT 240 at Radeon 4670 prices, and the GDDR5 GT 240 just under 9600 GT prices. That's where the new card is a recommended buy.

 

[cyberkuberiah]

[citation][nom]deadcat[/nom]awesome for an HTPC!![/citation]

yes , indeed.

 

[dark_lord69]

If you are going to spend close to $100 on a video card then you might as well get the ATi HD 4870.
I found it for only $11 over the sub $100 range.
The performance difference would DEFINITELY be worth $11.

http://www.eworldsale.com/powercolor-ax4870-1gbd5-pph-pcs-radeon-hd-4870-1gb-gddr5-pci-express-20_5882_29335.html

 

[noob2222]

Not a bad article, but very misleading however. Sub $100 tested with cards over $100? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814261056&cm_re=240-_-14-261-056-_-Product

At that price its competing with the 4770s not the 4670. But this is an Nvidia article, gotta make them look good by omitting certain facts.

 

[rdhood]

What dark_lord69 and noob2222 said. The 4670 is starting to see after-rebate prices of just $40. The $100 price point is closer to the 4770.

 

[Ehsan w]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]The GT 240 isn't a rebadge, it's a new GPU based on the same architecture as the GTX 200 series.[/citation]

that doesn't really matter,
it still sucks even compared to an old 9600 gt

 

[TheViper]

Price debate fail.

These cards are price in the HD 4850 to HD 4870 range. Almost twice that of the HD 4670.

You should have at least pitted them against the HD 4830 or HD 4770 instead.

 

[Jenoin]

Underclocked ATI card. Overclocked Nvidia. The ATI card ~half the cost...

This would have made an interesting comparison

ATI 4850

Palit GT240

Or a 4770

 

[Guest]

Yet another NVIDIA advert,complete crap,i`d just wish someone somehow could shut you down,in your face NVIDIA loving,redo the article with the correct $$$ gfx cards,as stated a 4770/4850 are in this price point and kick this piece of `crap` to death.You are a joke