GeForce GT 240: Low Power, High Performance, Sub-$100
- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (145) |
- Share
Table of contents
- 1 – Introduction
- 2 – GeForce GT 240 Specifications And Hardware
- 3 – Zotac's GeForce GT 240 512MB AMP! Edition
- 4 – Palit's GeForce GT 240 1GB Sonic Edition
- 5 – GeForce Vs. GeForce? The Sub-$100 Market
- 6 – The Competition, Cont.’d
- 7 – Test System And Benchmarks
- 8 – Synthetic Benchmarks: 3DMark Vantage
- 9 – Game Benchmarks: Crysis
- 10 – Game Benchmarks: Far Cry 2
- 11 – Game Benchmarks: World In Conflict
- 12 – Game Benchmarks: Resident Evil 5
- 13 – Game Benchmarks: Fallout 3
- 14 – Game Benchmarks: Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X.
- 15 – Game Benchmarks: Left 4 Dead
- 16 – Game Benchmarks: Anti-Aliasing And Anisotropic Filtering
- 17 – Game Benchmarks: Video RAM
- 18 – Game Benchmarks: PhysX
- 19 – Power And Temperature Benchmarks
- 20 – Conclusion
- 21 – More on this topic
Let's face it. The situation has been less than ideal for Nvidia over the past few months.
The first thing that comes to mind was the successful launch of AMD's new DirectX 11-ready Radeon HD 5000-series. Nvidia doesn't yet have its DirectX 11 answer ready. Admittedly, though, with scant availability of AMD's high-end Radeon HD 5870 and 5850 cards, this isn't the root of Nvidia's problems. The real thorn in the company's side is the fact that AMD has proven twice now, without a doubt, the smaller, scalable GPU and GDDR5 route it took with the Radeon HD 4000- and 5000-series is a winner from a price/performance/profitability standpoint.
As a result of AMD's success selling low-cost graphic cards with modest 3D performance, Nvidia has been forced to squeeze high-end GPUs into service as sub-$100 trench fighters. Take, for example, the GeForce 9600 GSO, 9600 GT, and 9800 GT, none of which were ever originally intended for the sub-$100 market. Complex GPUs and memory buses keep costs high, power usage is usually abysmal compared to the efficient Radeon HD 4670, and performance can't quite approach the Radeon HD 4850. The newer G96 version of the GeForce 9600 GSO helped cut costs a bit with its narrower 128-bit memory interface, but the majority of sub-$100 GeForces likely remain more expensive to manufacture than their Radeon counterparts.
- GeForce GT 220 Video...
With Nvidia's next-generation DirectX 11 flagship 'Fermi' delayed until next year, its prospects for wowing video card buyers in the near future are looking pretty dim. We had hopes that the recently-released GeForce G 210 and GT 220 would shake things up a little. And while the combination of 40nm lithography and DirectX 10.1 support helps the GeForce GT 220 bring a fight to ATI's Radeon HD 4650, the Radeon HD 4670 remains unchallenged when it comes to price/performance and low power usage.
Unchallenged, that is, until today.
The company is now officially unveiling its GeForce GT 240, the most powerful reference card that doesn't require an auxiliary PCIe power connector. It doesn't have DirectX 11 support, but it has exactly what Nvidia needs right now in the sub-$100 category: low production costs, low power usage, and better-than-Radeon HD 4670 performance. Should it matter that ATI has a pair of entry-level DirectX 11 GPUs planned for Q1 of next year? Only if you're willing to wait. Let's see what Nvidia is offering today.
- 1 / 8
- Next
-
Sponsored links
Related forums topics
- My Computer Turns On For 3 Seconds, Then Shuts Off
- Will THIS rig play good games? is is great/good for gaming?
- Will this play crysis, dawn of war 2 and all of the new games?
- CPU RAM VS GHAPIC?
- Intel Core i7-950 processor
- I need help overclocking my core 2 duo E6550
- Overclocking my pc
- best cpu cooler
- Overclock new build
- Not Very Good at This Configuration Stuff..Need Help Please
- Does clearing CMOS on ASUS P6T clear OC Profile(s)?
- RAM Question
- (Solved) Gigabyte EP45-UD3P Bios Settings
- GA-EP45-UD3P and Vista 64 bit install
Related articles
-
I'll first say that the new GeForce GT 220 and 210 represent class-leaders as far as power usage is concerned. They also add some new-to-Nvidia features, such as DirectX 10.1, enhanced video decode capabilities, and an integrated audio controller that...
-
Best Graphics Cards For The Money: March '09
Detailed graphics card specifications and reviews are great—that is, if you have the time to do the research. But at the end of the day, what a gamer needs is the best graphics card within a certain budget. So if you don’t have the time to research...
-
Let's start off by looking at the major specifications of the new GeForce GT 220 and 210 graphics cards: GT 220G210GPU DesignationGT216GT218Fabrication Process40 nmGraphics Clock (Texture and ROP units)625 MHz589 MHzProcessor Clock (Shader Units)...
awesome for an HTPC!!
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...
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?
The memory on the Diamond Radeon HD 4670 is clocked 200Mhz below reference speeds.
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.
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.
The kicker: No SLI support.
the card is pointless, it's Nvidia's attempt to get some $$$ before an EP!C FA!L launch of Fermi
The card is pointless, it's Nvidia's attempt to get some $$$ before an EP!C FA!L launch of Fermi.
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?
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.
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!
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
Nearly two years ago i bought a GF 9600 Gt for 130 bucks the cards are necka dn neck with it , so they don't really itnerest me forget the sub 100 range , nvida is missing stock in the 130-150 price range as is i'm looking at grappinga ati 4870 as my next upgrade (can get one for 145 off newegg) the closest card nvida has to this is a 260 and even at new egg the 2690's price doesnt go below 165 they need to knock 20 bucks off the 260 to get my money
Edit : the 260's price *
At any price point it's just hard to get excited when a company is just re-badging/re-naming older cards.
The GT 240 isn't a rebadge, it's a new GPU based on the same architecture as the GTX 200 series.
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.
The memory on the Diamond Radeon HD 4670 is clocked 200Mhz below reference speeds.
Absolutely right, fixed!
From the benchmarks the change in performance isn't worth that large ramp up in price.
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.
awesome for an HTPC!!
yes , indeed.