AMD Radeon R7 240 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti Comparison

The database pits two discontinued entry-level GPUs against each other: NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 550 Ti, a 2011 card built on the Fermi 2.0 architecture, and AMD's Radeon R7 240, a 2013 part using the newer GCN 1.0 design. The recorded data shows a clear performance split, with the GTX 550 Ti winning the only head-to-head benchmark by 13.2%, but the R7 240 countering with dramatically lower power draw, double the memory capacity, and a far more modern feature set. Both cards sit in the lower third of the all-GPU rankings, so neither is a performance play today; the interesting story is how differently each manufacturer spent its silicon budget.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the benchmark data?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5731 versus 5063 for the Radeon R7 240, a 13.2% lead for the NVIDIA card. That single test accounts for the entire head-to-head record in the database.

Q: How much more power does the GTX 550 Ti use?

A: Quite a lot. The GTX 550 Ti has a TDP of 116 W and requires a 6-pin PCIe power connector, with a suggested PSU of 300 W. The R7 240 draws just 30 W, needs no auxiliary power connector at all, and its suggested PSU is only 200 W.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The R7 240, with 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus delivering 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 550 Ti has only 1024 MB, but it is much faster GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, producing 98.50 GB/s of bandwidth, more than three times what the AMD card offers.

Q: How do the two compare against the full GPU landscape?

A: Both rank low. The GTX 550 Ti sits at the 33rd percentile versus all GPUs in the database, the R7 240 at the 30th. The NVIDIA card holds a modest three-point percentile edge.

Q: Which card is more compact and easier to fit?

A: The R7 240. It is a single-slot card measuring 168 mm long, while the GTX 550 Ti is a dual-slot design, 210 mm long. The AMD card is also shorter by a wide margin.

Q: Which card supports Vulkan?

A: Only the R7 240, which lists Vulkan 1.2.170 support. The GTX 550 Ti's API record shows DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but no Vulkan entry. The R7 240 also carries the newer DirectX 12 (11_1) feature level.

Architecture Differences

These cards come from different technological eras, and the recorded specs make the gap obvious. The GTX 550 Ti uses NVIDIA's GF116 chip on the Fermi 2.0 architecture, produced on TSMC's 40 nm process. It packs 1,170 million transistors onto a 238 mm² die, for a density of 4.9M transistors per mm². The R7 240's Oland chip runs on AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture at TSMC's 28 nm node, squeezing 950 million transistors into just 77 mm². That works out to 12.3M transistors per mm², more than double the density of the NVIDIA part, and it explains how AMD shipped a much smaller, cooler-running chip two and a half years later.

The internal resource split is lopsided in opposite directions. AMD gives the R7 240 more shading units, 320 versus 192 for the GTX 550 Ti, reflecting GCN's design priorities. NVIDIA's card counters with far more back-end hardware: 32 texture mapping units against 20, and 24 render output units against just 8 on the AMD card. That ROP advantage is enormous, three to one, and it shows up directly in the pixel rate figures, where the GTX 550 Ti manages 7.200 GPixel/s to the R7 240's 6.240 GPixel/s. The texture rate gap is even wider, 28.80 GTexel/s versus 15.60 GTexel/s for AMD.

Raw compute tells a similar story. The GTX 550 Ti delivers 691.2 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput against 499.2 GFLOPS for the R7 240, a comfortable lead for NVIDIA despite the smaller shading unit count. Neither card has RT cores or tensor cores, as expected for GPUs of this vintage.

The memory subsystems diverge sharply. NVIDIA pairs its 1024 MB frame buffer with GDDR5 running at 1026 MHz, 4.1 Gbps effective, across a 192-bit bus for 98.50 GB/s of bandwidth. AMD fits 2 GB of DDR3 clocked at 900 MHz, 1800 Mbps effective, on a 128-bit bus, yielding only 28.80 GB/s. The AMD card wins on capacity; the NVIDIA card wins decisively on speed.

Feature support follows the release dates. The 2013 R7 240 connects over PCIe 3.0 x8 and offers outputs of one DVI, one HDMI 1.4a, and one VGA, plus Vulkan 1.2.170 in its API record. The 2011 GTX 550 Ti uses PCIe 2.0 x16 and provides two DVI outputs plus one mini-HDMI 1.3a, with no Vulkan entry. Both report OpenGL 4.6 and DirectX 12 support, though at different feature levels.

The Verdict

The data supports a simple split. For performance, the GTX 550 Ti is the pick: it wins the only recorded head-to-head benchmark by 13.2%, posts higher pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 numbers, and holds a three-point percentile edge in the all-GPU rankings (33 versus 30). Anyone choosing purely on the recorded results should take the NVIDIA card.

The R7 240's case rests on efficiency, capacity, and convenience. Its 30 W TDP versus 116 W means no auxiliary power connector, a single-slot footprint, a 168 mm length that fits tighter enclosures, and a 200 W suggested PSU instead of 300 W. It also carries 2 GB of memory instead of 1024 MB, a newer API set including Vulkan 1.2.170, and a newer DirectX feature level. For a system where power, space, or connectivity constraints dominate, the recorded specs favor the AMD card. Neither, it must be said, ranks highly overall; both sit near the 30th percentile of all GPUs in the database.

Specification Differences

• Architecture: Fermi 2.0 (GTX 550 Ti) versus GCN 1.0 (R7 240)
• Chip: GF116 versus Oland
• Generation: GeForce 500 versus Volcanic Islands (R7 200)
• Release date: 2011-03-14 versus 2013-10-07
• Process node: 40 nm versus 28 nm, both on TSMC
• Transistors / die size: 1,170 million on 238 mm² versus 950 million on 77 mm²
• Transistor density: 4.9M/mm² versus 12.3M/mm²
• Clocks: GTX 550 Ti lists a memory clock of 1026 MHz (4.1 Gbps effective) with no base or boost figures recorded; the R7 240 runs a 730 MHz base and 780 MHz boost with memory at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective)
• Memory: 1024 MB GDDR5, 192-bit, 98.50 GB/s versus 2 GB DDR3, 128-bit, 28.80 GB/s
• Shading units: 192 versus 320
• TMUs: 32 versus 20
• ROPs: 24 versus 8
• Pixel rate: 7.200 GPixel/s versus 6.240 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 28.80 GTexel/s versus 15.60 GTexel/s
• FP32: 691.2 GFLOPS versus 499.2 GFLOPS
• TDP: 116 W versus 30 W
• Slot width / length: Dual-slot, 210 mm versus single-slot, 168 mm
• Power connectors: 1x 6-pin versus none
• Suggested PSU: 300 W versus 200 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 2.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x8
• Outputs: 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a versus 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x VGA
• APIs: DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, no Vulkan versus DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.170
• Launch MSRP: 149 USD versus 69 USD
• Predecessor / successor: GeForce 400 and GeForce 600 versus Sea Islands and Pirate Islands

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only one test appears in the head-to-head record, and it goes to NVIDIA. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 550 Ti scores 5731 against 5063 for the R7 240, a 13.2% margin. That gives the GTX 550 Ti a clean sweep of the recorded head-to-head results, one win to zero.

Context from the broader database reinforces how narrow the gap is in absolute terms. The GTX 550 Ti's average score of 5731 places it in a tight cluster with its nearest rivals: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX at 5721 (just 0.2% behind), the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 at 5712 (0.3% behind), the AMD Radeon HD 8790M at 5691 (0.7% behind), and the AMD Radeon R7 M465, which actually scores 5841, 1.9% ahead of it.

The R7 240's average of 5063 lands it among its own cohort: the AMD Radeon R7 M340 matches it exactly at 5063, the FirePro W4170M sits 0.6% behind at 5034, the R5 M430 0.9% behind at 5018, and the R7 Graphics 1.3% behind at 4998. In other words, the 13.2% gap between these two cards is larger than any delta within either card's immediate rival group, confirming the GTX 550 Ti as the faster part while both remain low-percentile performers, 33rd versus 30th across all GPUs in the database.