AMD Radeon R7 240 vs AMD Radeon R7 Graphics Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 240 and the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics are two very different interpretations of the same product tier, and the benchmark data shows a clear, though narrow, winner. The discrete R7 240 holds a decisive lead in raw compute performance, but the integrated R7 Graphics in Kaveri APUs offers a superior feature set and API support that narrows the practical gap. For users building a new system today, the R7 Graphics' 12_0 DirectX support and Vulkan capability make it the more future-proof option, while the R7 240 remains a viable option for those needing a simple, low-power discrete card for older systems.

The Verdict

The data points to a split decision. The AMD Radeon R7 240 wins the only head-to-head benchmark, posting a Geekbench OpenCL score of 5063 against the R7 Graphics' 4015, a 26.1% advantage. This makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads that rely on OpenCL, where its dedicated memory bandwidth of 28.80 GB/s provides a distinct advantage over the R7 Graphics' system-shared memory. However, the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics counters with a Geekbench Vulkan score of 5980, which is not present in the R7 240's data, indicating it is the only one of the two capable of running Vulkan workloads. Furthermore, its DirectX 12 (12_0) support is a full feature level above the R7 240's 12 (11_1). For gaming, the R7 Graphics is the better choice due to its superior API compatibility, even though its raw OpenCL compute is slower. The R7 240 is for users who prioritize compute over compatibility; the R7 Graphics is for those who want the best gaming feature set from an IGP.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture. The R7 240 is built on GCN 1.0 and uses the Oland chip, part of the Volcanic Islands (R7 200) generation. In contrast, the R7 Graphics is a GCN 2.0 integrated graphics processor (IGP) built on the Spectre Lite chip, hailing from the Kaveri generation. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process, but the R7 240 is built by TSMC, while the R7 Graphics is produced by GlobalFoundries. This leads to a significant difference in die size: the R7 240's Oland die is a relatively small 77 mm² with 950 million transistors, while the R7 Graphics' Spectre Lite die is much larger at 245 mm² with 2,410 million transistors—though this larger die is shared with the CPU cores in the APU package. Consequently, the transistor density is higher on the discrete card at 12.3M / mm², compared to 9.8M / mm² for the IGP.

The architectural core counts also differ, with the R7 Graphics featuring more execution resources. The R7 Graphics has 384 shading units and 24 texture mapping units (TMUs), while the R7 240 has 320 shading units and 20 TMUs. Both share the same number of raster output units (ROPs) at 8. This gives the R7 Graphics a higher theoretical texture fillrate of 17.28 GTexel/s versus the R7 240's 15.60 GTexel/s. Interestingly, despite having fewer cores, the R7 240 achieves a higher pixel rate of 6.240 GPixel/s compared to the R7 Graphics' 5.760 GPixel/s. The most critical architectural difference lies in memory: the R7 240 has dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, while the R7 Graphics relies entirely on system shared memory, making its bandwidth system-dependent. Finally, the R7 Graphics supports a newer DirectX 12 feature level (12_0) than the R7 240 (11_1), a significant generational leap.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single direct comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is a decisive win for the discrete R7 240. The R7 240 scores 5063, while the R7 Graphics scores 4015, a difference of 26.1%. This is a substantial margin that reflects the benefits of dedicated memory. The R7 240's 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth, while modest, is far more consistent than the R7 Graphics' system-dependent bandwidth, which can be bottlenecked by CPU and memory speeds. This advantage is critical for compute tasks that require constant, high-speed data access.

However, the benchmark picture is incomplete without the Vulkan test. The R7 Graphics has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 5980, which the R7 240 cannot match because it lacks that API in its feature set. While this is not a direct head-to-head comparison, it is a significant data point. In practical terms, the R7 Graphics is capable of running Vulkan titles, while the R7 240 is not. This means that in newer game engines that leverage Vulkan, the R7 Graphics would likely outperform the R7 240 despite its lower OpenCL score, as it has a functional path to the workload. Therefore, while the R7 240 wins the compute race, the R7 Graphics wins the compatibility race, which is often more important for gaming.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for these two GPUs reveal their fundamentally different natures. The R7 240 is a discrete, single-slot card with fixed dimensions of 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the R7 Graphics is an IGP with no physical dimensions, as it is integrated into the motherboard. The R7 240 has a base clock of 730 MHz and a boost clock of 780 MHz, while the R7 Graphics has no listed base or boost clocks. Memory is the most stark contrast: the R7 240 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 with a 128-bit bus, whereas the R7 Graphics has "System Shared" memory of an undefined size, type, and bus width. The R7 240's memory operates at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while the R7 Graphics' bandwidth is system dependent.

Power requirements also differ. The R7 240 has a TDP of 30 W and requires a 200 W power supply, although it needs no additional power connectors. The R7 Graphics has a lower TDP of 25 W, but its power draw is part of the overall APU package. The R7 240 uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface, while the R7 Graphics uses an IGP bus interface. Display outputs are also different: the R7 240 offers a fixed set of 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x VGA, while the R7 Graphics' outputs are motherboard dependent. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170, but the R7 Graphics supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the R7 240 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). The R7 240 has a launch MSRP of 69 USD.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 240 is significantly faster in OpenCL. It scores 5063 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 26.1% higher than the R7 Graphics' score of 4015.

Q: Can the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics run Vulkan games?

A: Yes. The R7 Graphics has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 5980, and its API list includes Vulkan 1.2.170. The R7 240 does not have a Vulkan benchmark score, indicating it lacks this capability.

Q: Which GPU has better DirectX support?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics has better DirectX support. It supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the R7 240 only supports DirectX 12 (11_1), a lower feature level.

Q: What is the main difference in memory architecture?

A: The R7 240 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The R7 Graphics uses system shared memory, meaning its memory size, bus width, and bandwidth are all dependent on the host system's RAM.

Q: How do their core counts compare?

A: The R7 Graphics has more execution units. It features 384 shading units and 24 TMUs, while the R7 240 has 320 shading units and 20 TMUs. Both have 8 ROPs.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The R7 240 has a higher pixel rate of 6.240 GPixel/s, despite having fewer shaders. The R7 Graphics has a pixel rate of 5.760 GPixel/s.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 240 wins in scenarios that are bound by raw compute throughput and dedicated memory. Its 26.1% lead in OpenCL performance makes it the superior choice for general-purpose compute tasks like OpenCL-accelerated video encoding or physics simulations. The fixed 28.80 GB/s of memory bandwidth ensures predictable performance, unlike the R7 Graphics' system-dependent bandwidth. Its fixed display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x VGA) also make it a straightforward plug-and-play solution for older monitors without adapter concerns. It is also a discrete card with a 30 W TDP, making it a simple drop-in upgrade for a desktop.

The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics wins in modern gaming and API compatibility. Its support for DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan (with a 5980 Geekbench Vulkan score) means it can run newer game titles that the R7 240 simply cannot execute. The higher shading unit count (384 vs 320) and TMU count (24 vs 20) give it a theoretical texture rate advantage of 17.28 GTexel/s, which benefits games that are texture-heavy. While its OpenCL score is lower, its feature set is more aligned with current software standards. Its lower TDP of 25 W also makes it a more power-efficient solution for an integrated build. For a new system, the R7 Graphics is the more capable gaming platform.