AMD Radeon R7 240 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is significantly faster. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scores 18,129 versus 5,063 for the AMD Radeon R7 240. This represents a 72.1% higher score for the NVIDIA card.

Q: How do these two cards compare in terms of memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti has a major advantage. It uses 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s, while the R7 240 has 2 GB of DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 28.80 GB/s. The NVIDIA card delivers nearly four times the memory bandwidth.

Q: What are the process node differences between the two GPUs?

A: The R7 240 is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the GTX 1050 Ti uses a 14 nm process at Samsung. The NVIDIA chip packs 3,300 million transistors on a 132 mm² die, compared to 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die for the AMD part.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti dominates in pixel throughput. It achieves 44.54 GPixel/s, while the R7 240 manages only 6.240 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA card is over seven times faster in this metric.

Q: Do both cards require external power connectors?

A: No, neither card requires external power connectors. The R7 240 has a 30 W TDP and the GTX 1050 Ti has a 75 W TDP, but both are powered entirely through the PCIe slot.

Q: What is the launch MSRP difference?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 240 launched with an MSRP of 69 USD, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti launched with an MSRP of 139 USD.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial and reflects two distinct design eras. The AMD Radeon R7 240 uses the Oland chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, belonging to the Volcanic Islands (R7 200) generation. It is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 950 million transistors packed into a 77 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 12.3M per mm².

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is built on the GP107 chip using the Pascal architecture, part of the GeForce 10-series generation. It is manufactured on a 14 nm process at Samsung, integrating 3,300 million transistors on a 132 mm² die. The transistor density is 25.0M per mm², which is more than double the density of the AMD chip.

The compute resources differ dramatically. The R7 240 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation units. The GTX 1050 Ti has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This means the NVIDIA card has 2.4 times the shader count, 2.4 times the texture units, and 4 times the ROPs.

Memory architecture also separates these two parts. The R7 240 uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 1050 Ti uses 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on the same 128-bit bus, but delivers 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The clock speeds also favor NVIDIA: the R7 240 runs at a 730 MHz base and 780 MHz boost, while the GTX 1050 Ti runs at 1,291 MHz base and 1,392 MHz boost.

The feature sets reflect their respective generations. The R7 240 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 1050 Ti supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA card also supports a higher HDMI version (2.0 versus 1.4a) and adds DisplayPort 1.4a output, while the AMD card offers VGA output instead.

The bus interface differs as well: the R7 240 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the GTX 1050 Ti uses PCIe 3.0 x16, providing double the bandwidth for host communication.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single recorded head-to-head benchmark result shows a decisive win for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 1050 Ti scores 18,129 while the AMD Radeon R7 240 scores 5,063. The delta is 72.1% in favor of the NVIDIA card, meaning the R7 240 achieves only about 28% of the GTX 1050 Ti's score in this compute workload.

This OpenCL result is consistent with the raw specification differences. The GTX 1050 Ti's FP32 throughput is 2.138 TFLOPS, compared to 499.2 GFLOPS for the R7 240. That is a 4.3 times advantage in raw floating-point compute. The texture rate shows a similar gap: 66.82 GTexel/s versus 15.60 GTexel/s, a 4.3 times difference. Pixel rates are even more lopsided, with the NVIDIA card at 44.54 GPixel/s versus 6.240 GPixel/s, a 7.1 times advantage.

The benchmark data for the GTX 1050 Ti includes additional tests that provide context for its overall performance profile. In PassMark G3D, it scores 6,340. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 10,001. In Geekbench Metal, it scores 7,834. Its PassMark GPU Compute score is 2,652. The R7 240 has no corresponding data for these tests, but the available OpenCL comparison shows the NVIDIA card's dominance in general compute tasks.

The GTX 1050 Ti's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 4,193, while the R7 240's average is 5,063. This apparent contradiction is explained by the fact that the two averages are computed over different test sets. The R7 240 has only one recorded benchmark, while the GTX 1050 Ti has eleven, including several PassMark tests with lower scores that pull down its average.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 240 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti |

|---|---|---|

| Process node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 950 million | 3,300 million |

| Die size | 77 mm² | 132 mm² |

| Transistor density | 12.3M / mm² | 25.0M / mm² |

| Base clock | 730 MHz | 1,291 MHz |

| Boost clock | 780 MHz | 1,392 MHz |

| Memory clock | 900 MHz, 1800 Mbps effective | 1,752 MHz, 7 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 28.80 GB/s | 112.1 GB/s |

| Shading units | 320 | 768 |

| TMUs | 20 | 48 |

| ROPs | 8 | 32 |

| Pixel rate | 6.240 GPixel/s | 44.54 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 15.60 GTexel/s | 66.82 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 499.2 GFLOPS | 2.138 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 30 W | 75 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Suggested PSU | 200 W | 250 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x VGA | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX support | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | 168 mm length, 69 mm height | 145 mm length, 111 mm height |

| Release date | 2013-10-07 | 2016-10-24 |

| Launch MSRP | 69 USD | 139 USD |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 240 does not win any recorded benchmark against the GTX 1050 Ti. Its only advantage in the data is in physical size and power requirements. It is a single-slot card with a 30 W TDP, requiring only a 200 W suggested PSU. It measures 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The GTX 1050 Ti is a dual-slot card with a 75 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU, measuring 145 mm in length but 111 mm in height. For compact, low-power builds, the R7 240 fits where the taller dual-slot NVIDIA card might not.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti wins on every performance metric in the database. It is 72.1% ahead in the Geekbench OpenCL test. It delivers more than double the shading units, 2.4 times the texture units, and four times the ROPs. Its memory bandwidth is 112.1 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s, a 3.9 times advantage. Its FP32 performance is 2.138 TFLOPS versus 499.2 GFLOPS, a 4.3 times advantage. Its pixel rate is 44.54 GPixel/s versus 6.240 GPixel/s, a 7.1 times advantage.

The GTX 1050 Ti also supports a more modern feature set. It has DirectX 12_1 support versus 11_1, Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170, and includes DisplayPort 1.4a output. Its memory capacity is double at 4 GB versus 2 GB, which matters for larger textures and higher resolution workloads.

The percentile rankings show a nuanced picture. The R7 240 sits at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 1050 Ti sits at the 25th percentile. This reflects the broader benchmark set for the NVIDIA card, which includes lower-scoring PassMark tests. The nearest rivals for the R7 240 are AMD Radeon R7 M340 (0% delta), AMD FirePro W4170M (0.6% ahead), AMD Radeon R5 M430 (0.9% ahead), and AMD Radeon R7 Graphics (1.3% ahead). The nearest rivals for the GTX 1050 Ti are AMD Radeon R5 M330 (0.6% behind), NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (1% behind), NVIDIA Quadro K3000M (1.1% ahead), and AMD Radeon Vega 3 (1.8% ahead).

The Verdict

The data points to a clear hierarchy. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is the substantially faster GPU in every recorded comparison. Its 72.1% advantage in OpenCL compute, combined with its 4.3 times FP32 throughput and 7.1 times pixel rate, makes it the obvious choice for anyone needing actual graphics or compute performance.

The AMD Radeon R7 240 has a narrow set of legitimate use cases based on the recorded data. It is a single-slot card with a 30 W TDP, no power connector requirement, and a 200 W suggested PSU. It is shorter and lower-profile than the GTX 1050 Ti. For a system with minimal space and a weak power supply, the R7 240 is the only one of these two that may physically fit and operate within power limits.

The GTX 1050 Ti, while requiring a dual-slot footprint and a 75 W TDP, still does not need external power connectors and only asks for a 250 W suggested PSU. It delivers 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and a 128-bit bus with 112.1 GB/s bandwidth, which is adequate for modern textures and higher resolutions. Its DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4 support make it more future-proof for current API workloads.

The choice depends entirely on constraints. If the system can accommodate a dual-slot card and a 75 W TDP, the GTX 1050 Ti is the superior product on every benchmark and specification that matters for performance. If the system is limited to a single-slot, 30 W card with no external power and a 200 W PSU, then the R7 240 is the only option between these two, and its performance should be understood as 72.1% below the GTX 1050 Ti in OpenCL compute. The database shows no scenario where the R7 240 outperforms the GTX 1050 Ti in any measured workload.