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

[Guest]

Tom conclusion:
nVidia rocks! GT240 (only?) costs 50% more than an AMD 4670 and it is superior to it.

This is the fact (at this moment) in Denmark. GT240 costs 50% more than AMDs 4670. AMDs 4770 is at same price (4770 is is actually a tiny bit cheaper)

Obviously GT240 should not be compared to a similar priced product - or?
Would it give a wrong conclusion?

Come on, Tom. Surely you can do better than this. If you want more money for nVidia put it up against an AMD 4650 ...

 

[wayneepalmer]

I am curious how it stands up to the 250 GTS.

 

[hundredislandsboy]

I am curious how it stands up to the 250 GTS.

Are you serious about being curious as to how it compares to the GTS 250? Lol.

Rough estimate the GTS 250 has three to four times the processing power over the lowly GT 240.

 

[wayneepalmer]

That's why I asked the question. I've got an MSI 250 GTS 512 (I paid a little over $100 for it - whenever my rebate shows up!) and it seems okay but given the glowing review here, I was curious if I got my money's worth.

 

[hundredislandsboy]

That's why I asked the question. I've got an MSI 250 GTS 512 (I paid a little over $100 for it - whenever my rebate shows up!) and it seems okay but given the glowing review here, I was curious if I got my money's worth.

With the GTS 250, you got better value than had you purchased the GT240 which IMO is a joke and insults the gamer crowd.

However, dollar for dollar ATI is kicking ass on Nvidia cards at all segments of the market at the moment and I don't even have not one ATI card (see profile).

Mark my words, AMD stock will do better than Nvidia for the next 12 months.

 

[wayneepalmer]

Perhaps, but after all the BS I've had to put up with in dealing with ATI's buggy software and the occasional defective cards (a Visiontek 1550 AGP with DVI port that shorted out the first time I plugged in a new wide-screen monitor - and all the crap that I went thru with the TV tuner software on an Radian AIW 9800 Pro 128), I have "issues" with buying ATI cards.

 

[hundredislandsboy]

Perhaps, but after all the BS I've had to put up with in dealing with ATI's buggy software and the occasional defective cards (a Visiontek 1550 AGP with DVI port that shorted out the first time I plugged in a new wide-screen monitor - and all the crap that I went thru with the TV tuner software on an Radian AIW 9800 Pro 128), I have "issues" with buying ATI cards.

I'm with you about issues and it seems to me the general consensus is Nvidia puts out mature or better-tested drivers and that their cards don't have as much heat issues. But I'm not hearing that kind chatter so much lately. If you have the CPU to push it, your next logical GPU upgrade should be about an HD 4890.

 

[brockh]

Perhaps, but after all the BS I've had to put up with in dealing with ATI's buggy software and the occasional defective cards (a Visiontek 1550 AGP with DVI port that shorted out the first time I plugged in a new wide-screen monitor - and all the crap that I went thru with the TV tuner software on an Radian AIW 9800 Pro 128), I have "issues" with buying ATI cards.

Look everybody this guy had problems with ATi like five generations ago and is still holding on to it.

 

[Guest]

epic fail the price shoud be 70$ max

 

[Guest]

GT240 is a joke from nvidia to fight 4670 which is IMO is an old card. wait for 5670 on the upcoming Q1 2010.i would like to see how they'll do about it.

 

[kedon]

[citation][nom]brockh[/nom]Look everybody this guy had problems with ATi like five generations ago and is still holding on to it.[/citation]

Umm, I do not see why he should not remember bad experiences with a company whether it was recent, or several years back. Guy has the right to remember the bad experiences.

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

i have this card and it performs on par with the 4670!

 

[Guest]

People are complaining about annoying graphical glitches on new 5970s, so I don't think ATI's driver problems are a thing of the past.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]mikesu11[/nom]People are complaining about annoying graphical glitches on new 5970s, so I don't think ATI's driver problems are a thing of the past.[/citation]

People complain about both ATi and Nvidia glitches, that will never change. There will always be glitches with both vendors.

But as a hardware reviewer, I haven't seen a show-stopper from either company for years. They both have their nuances, but major problems are usually taken care of within a month or two.

 

[Guest]

At this moment NVIDIA doesn't have any energy efficient (40nm technology) video card for making a lot of computations, except geforce 240. However, 240 ir weak and there is no possibility to use several card on one motherboard. I started to program for geforce because of CUDA, but no I think to switch all to AMD/ATI video cards.

 

[Guest]

Only geforce 240 with GDDR5 could be considered as a replacement for 9600gt. Typical geforce 240 with GDDR3 is much weaker that 9600gt (9600gt has much better memory bandwidth, and the bandwidth is the problem).

 

[demonhunter5110]

im running the gt240 512 DDR5 and it is great for 68.99 on newegg after mail in rebate. it is top notch for that price range. all my games except crysis run maxed with AA. crysis runs very high without AA and im happy with that. i cant set my monitor over 1600 so thats the best i can get for now. it out performs the 4670 in a few different ways and the major loss to ATI is nvidias physx software. I get 2xs more FPS with this than a 4670 due to compatibility issues. that will change eventually but for now nvidia is the best card to get and for a low power decent priced card im am really happy with this.

 

[Guest]

How does the 8800 pwn the newer cards XD thanks for the review

 

[JonnyDough]

[citation][nom]Ramar[/nom]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?[/citation]

It should be, as power consumption will more than make up for any cost difference.

 

[Guest]

I got a gt240 gddr3 from some guy for 70$ and the card is 2x times beter the 9600gt

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]daaa[/nom]I got a gt240 gddr3 from some guy for 70$ and the card is 2x times beter the 9600gt[/citation]

No it isn't. Look at the benchmarks.

 

[Guest]

Hello people ,

I am in Egypt and I gotta tell u all that u shouldn't really upgrade to such 240 GT DDR3 , I don't know about the DDR5 edition , it doesn't worth neither launch price nor later prices ..
For those who have 8800s, 9800s and 9600s u mustn't even consider thinking about it I bought the 240 GT here in Egypt for nearly 103 $ which I regret so much, but the only positive thing about it I needn't change my power supply unit because it's 40nm as mentioned plus
I couldn't find the 9600 and couldn't save to buy the 135$ 9800.

one last thing , when I bought the GT 240 the salesman offered me a 5570 cheaper ATI card which he thought to be better than the GT 240 .. think he was right ?

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]Ahmed Ali[/nom]one last thing , when I bought the GT 240 the salesman offered me a 5570 cheaper ATI card which he thought to be better than the GT 240 .. think he was right ?[/citation]

The 5570 is faster than a DDR3 GT 240 but not quite as fast as a GDDR5 GT 240.

 

[Guest]

My processor Overlocking AMD Phenom X4 9550 2.2GHz@3.6GHz Playng GTA IV 4h Temperature 36"C...

 

[sfavors]

I bought this card after my 8800CTX fried after playing BIoshock2 for awhile. The reasons: DDR3 as opposed to the DDR2 on the 220, price, and my Nvidia motherboard chipset. It has performed adequately. That pretty much sums it up. Adequate. It's been awhile since I've upgraded my setup which was cutting edge maybe 5 yrs. ago. Definitely the next rig will be geared toward the new Radeon tech, which at this point is still overpriced.