AMD Radeon HD 8730M vs AMD Radeon R7 240 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded comparison in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, and it delivers a clear result. The AMD Radeon HD 8730M scores 5955 points, while the AMD Radeon R7 240 scores 5063 points. That works out to a 17.6% advantage for the HD 8730M, which represents a substantial gap in general-purpose compute performance.

Context from the database's nearest rival charts helps frame this margin. The HD 8730M sits at the 34th percentile among all GPUs, while the R7 240 sits at the 30th percentile. The HD 8730M's closest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA Quadro K620M at 5957 points (a 0% delta), the AMD Radeon HD 8750M at 5970 points (0.3% slower), the Intel UHD Graphics 730 at 5929 points (0.4% faster), and the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 at 5982 points (0.5% slower). This shows the HD 8730M is locked into a tight cluster of performance peers, with no significant separation from any of them.

The R7 240's nearest rivals tell a different story. It is exactly tied with the AMD Radeon R7 M340 at 5063 points (0% delta), and it leads the AMD FirePro W4170M by 0.6%, the AMD Radeon R5 M430 by 0.9%, and the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics by 1.3%. The R7 240 is clearly grouped with lower-tier mobile and integrated parts, and its 17.6% deficit to the HD 8730M is far larger than any of the margins within its own rival cluster.

The raw specification data supports this outcome. The HD 8730M carries 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The R7 240 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The HD 8730M has a 20% advantage in shading units and texture mapping units, which explains a meaningful portion of the performance gap. However, the clock speeds run in the opposite direction. The R7 240 has a base clock of 730 MHz and a boost clock of 780 MHz, while the HD 8730M runs at 650 MHz base and 700 MHz boost. Despite the R7 240's higher clocks, the HD 8730M's larger shader count wins out in the OpenCL workload.

Pixel throughput also favors the R7 240 slightly. The R7 240 delivers 6.240 GPixel/s, while the HD 8730M delivers 5.600 GPixel/s. Texture throughput favors the HD 8730M at 16.80 GTexel/s versus 15.60 GTexel/s for the R7 240. Floating point performance, measured as FP32, gives the HD 8730M 537.6 GFLOPS against 499.2 GFLOPS for the R7 240. None of these theoretical rates directly mirror the 17.6% benchmark delta, but they collectively indicate that the HD 8730M has the stronger compute configuration.

Memory is identical on paper. Both cards use 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, with 900 MHz memory clock and 1800 Mbps effective data rate, yielding 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory configuration therefore does not contribute to the performance difference.

The Verdict

The database's head-to-head result is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon HD 8730M wins the only recorded benchmark by 17.6%. For any workload that relies on OpenCL compute performance, the HD 8730M is the stronger choice between these two. Its 5955 point score places it at the 34th percentile, whereas the R7 240's 5063 points place it at the 30th percentile.

The R7 240 does have advantages that the benchmark data does not capture. It is a desktop card with a single-slot form factor, no power connectors, a 30 W TDP, and a suggested PSU of 200 W. It also has a defined physical footprint of 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height, along with display outputs of 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x VGA. The HD 8730M has no recorded TDP, slot width, power connector, or display output information in the database. So for a user building a low-profile desktop system with modest power delivery, the R7 240 has documented physical and power characteristics that the HD 8730M lacks.

However, the verdict from the performance data is straightforward. The HD 8730M is faster in the only recorded metric, and by a substantial margin. The R7 240's higher clock speeds and slightly better pixel rate do not translate into a win in the Geekbench OpenCL test. The HD 8730M's 384 shading units provide the compute advantage that matters in this comparison.

A user who prioritizes raw compute performance should select the HD 8730M. A user who needs a documented single-slot card with no auxiliary power requirement and explicit display outputs may find the R7 240 more suitable, but should expect to sacrifice roughly 17.6% of OpenCL performance in exchange.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8730M wins with a score of 5955, versus 5063 for the AMD Radeon R7 240, a 17.6% difference.

Q: How does the HD 8730M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The HD 8730M is essentially tied with the NVIDIA Quadro K620M at 5957 points, trails the AMD Radeon HD 8750M by 0.3%, leads the Intel UHD Graphics 730 by 0.4%, and trails the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 by 0.5%.

Q: How does the R7 240 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The R7 240 is exactly tied with the AMD Radeon R7 M340 at 5063 points, and leads the AMD FirePro W4170M by 0.6%, the AMD Radeon R5 M430 by 0.9%, and the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics by 1.3%.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory configuration?

A: Yes. Both use 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a 900 MHz memory clock and 28.80 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 240 has a base clock of 730 MHz and a boost clock of 780 MHz, while the AMD Radeon HD 8730M has a base clock of 650 MHz and a boost clock of 700 MHz.

Q: Does the R7 240 require a power connector?

A: No. The R7 240 has no power connectors, a TDP of 30 W, and a suggested PSU of 200 W.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several recorded fields. The HD 8730M uses the Mars chip while the R7 240 uses the Oland chip. Both are built on GCN 1.0 architecture and a 28 nm TSMC process, but they belong to different generations: the HD 8730M is in the Solar System (HD 8700M) generation, while the R7 240 is in the Volcanic Islands (R7 200) generation.

Clock speeds differ. The HD 8730M runs at 650 MHz base and 700 MHz boost. The R7 240 runs at 730 MHz base and 780 MHz boost. The R7 240 is the faster-clocked part by 80 MHz on both base and boost.

Shader configuration differs. The HD 8730M has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The R7 240 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The HD 8730M has more shading units and TMUs, while both share the same ROP count.

Pixel rate favors the R7 240 at 6.240 GPixel/s versus 5.600 GPixel/s for the HD 8730M. Texture rate favors the HD 8730M at 16.80 GTexel/s versus 15.60 GTexel/s. FP32 performance favors the HD 8730M at 537.6 GFLOPS versus 499.2 GFLOPS.

The R7 240 has recorded physical and power specifications that the HD 8730M lacks: a TDP of 30 W, a single-slot form factor, no power connectors, a suggested PSU of 200 W, dimensions of 168 mm by 69 mm, and display outputs of 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x VGA. The HD 8730M has no recorded values for these fields.

Release dates differ. The HD 8730M was released on 2013-03-31, while the R7 240 was released on 2013-10-07. Both are marked as end-of-life. The HD 8730M has no launch MSRP recorded; the R7 240 has a launch MSRP of 69 USD.

Both cards share the same memory specifications, bus interface (PCIe 3.0 x8), API support (DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.170), transistor count (950 million), die size (77 mm²), and transistor density (12.3M / mm²).

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on GCN 1.0 architecture, but they use different chips. The HD 8730M uses the Mars chip, and the R7 240 uses the Oland chip. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process, with identical transistor counts of 950 million and identical die sizes of 77 mm².

The core configurations differ. The HD 8730M has 384 shading units and 24 TMUs, while the R7 240 has 320 shading units and 20 TMUs. Both have 8 ROPs. This means the HD 8730M has the larger compute pipeline, which is the primary architectural reason for its benchmark advantage.

The R7 240 compensates with higher clock speeds. Its 730 MHz base and 780 MHz boost clocks give it a 12.3% clock advantage over the HD 8730M's 650 MHz base and 700 MHz boost. But the HD 8730M's 20% advantage in shading units and TMUs overcomes this clock deficit in the OpenCL benchmark.

Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. Neither has recorded FP16 performance. The memory subsystem is identical: 2 GB DDR3, 128-bit bus, 28.80 GB/s bandwidth.

The R7 240 is a desktop card with a 30 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 200 W. The HD 8730M is a mobile card with no recorded TDP or power specifications. The R7 240 has a documented single-slot design and explicit display outputs, while the HD 8730M has no recorded display output information.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon HD 8730M wins in compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 5955 is 17.6% higher than the R7 240's 5063. It also has higher shading unit count, higher TMU count, higher texture rate, and higher FP32 performance. For any OpenCL-based workload, the HD 8730M is the clear winner. Its 34th percentile ranking also places it above the R7 240's 30th percentile ranking.

The AMD Radeon R7 240 wins in clock speed and pixel throughput. It runs at 730 MHz base and 780 MHz boost, compared to 650 MHz and 700 MHz for the HD 8730M. Its pixel rate of 6.240 GPixel/s exceeds the HD 8730M's 5.600 GPixel/s. It also has the advantage of documented desktop specifications: a 30 W TDP, no power connectors, a 200 W suggested PSU, a single-slot form factor, and a full set of display outputs. The R7 240 physically fits into a conventional desktop build without additional power cabling.

The HD 8730M's nearest rival cluster shows it belongs among higher-performing mobile parts. Its closest peers, the NVIDIA Quadro K620M and the AMD Radeon HD 8750M, all score within 0.5% of it. The R7 240's closest peers, including the AMD Radeon R7 M340 and the AMD FirePro W4170M, all score within 1.3% of it, but at a much lower absolute level.

For a user whose primary concern is raw OpenCL throughput, the HD 8730M is the correct choice. For a user who needs a low-power, single-slot desktop card with no auxiliary power connector and documented display outputs, the R7 240 has practical advantages despite its lower compute performance. The benchmark data does not show any workload where the R7 240 outperforms the HD 8730M, so the decision comes down to physical and power requirements versus raw performance.