Radeon R7 240 

Released October, 2013
  • 730 MHz
  • 2 GB DDR3
7.2 Out of 10

Explore 2 desktops with the Radeon R7 240
The GPU core clock is maintained at 1000 MHz and the boost clock is configured at 1050 MHz.
by hassan-mujtaba (Oct, 2013)
In order to support the ability for NVIDIA’s Kepler architecture to launch additional workloads a new Grid Management Unit was built that handles the incoming workloads from the host system as well as the algorithmically created workloads and balances accordingly.
by Ryan-Shrout (May, 2012)

GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of the Radeon R7 240 among Desktop GPUs for under $200


Radeon R7 240
Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more


Radeon R7 240
T-Rex, Manhattan and Cloud Gate Factor


Radeon R7 240
Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more

Performance per Watt

Radeon R7 240
Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 30 more


Radeon R7 240
Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 30 more

Noise and Power

Radeon R7 240
TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more


Overall Score

Radeon R7 240

Benchmarks Real world tests of the Radeon R7 240

PassMark Industry standard benchmark for overall graphics card performanceData courtesy Passmark

Radeon R7 240

Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Radeon R7 240

Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Radeon R7 240
Radeon R7 370

Cloud Gate Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Radeon R7 240

PassMark Direct Compute Measures performance of general-purpose computing using Microsoft DirectCompute

Radeon R7 240

In The News From around the web


AMD Releases Radeon Software Crimson Edition 16.7.3 Drivers

by Sebastian Peak |
Every Radeon Software release strives to deliver new features, better performance and stability improvements.
AMD has released the Radeon Software Crimson Edition 16.7.3 driver, with improved performance in Rise of the Tomb Raider for Radeon RX 480 owners, as well as various bug fixes.
NVIDIA calls its software implementation GameWorks VR and AMD calls its software support LiquidVR.
Things will be tough for developers in this short window of time, but Oculus claims its necessary to "allow them to more rapidly evolve the software architecture and API.

TSMC Plans 10nm, 7nm, and "Very Steep" Ramping of 16nm.

by Scott Michaud |
Getting smaller features allows a chip designer to create products that are faster, cheaper, and consume less power.
Texas Instruments, on the other hand, decided that they would continue manufacturing but get out of the chip design business.

AMD Releases New WHQL Catalyst 15.7 Drivers

by Josh Walrath |
It is great to see AMD releasing a new set of drivers, but just like any addict... we can't wait for our next hit and what new features and performance they may bring.
This is fairly typical, but people are already reporting some better performance and CPU usage in WinX previews based on the latest build.

Specifications Full list of technical specs


GPU brand AMD
GPU name Oland
Market Desktop
Clock speed 730 MHz
Turbo clock speed 780 MHz
Is dual GPU No
Reference card None

raw performance

Shading units 320
Texture mapping units 20
Render output processors 8
Compute units 5
Pixel rate 6.24 GPixel/s
Texture rate 15.6 GTexel/s
Floating-point performance 499.2 GFLOPS


Memory clock speed 900 MHz
Effective memory clock speed 1,800 MHz
Memory bus 128 bit
Memory 2,048 MB
Memory type DDR3
Memory bandwidth 28.8 GB/s

noise and power

Report a correction


Showing 3 comments.
Before u talking trash..do u own r7 240?.. i have both graphic card 240 n 250 they are working great n playable modern game with medium setting without any bullshit.. like blue screen or whatever problem... if u want performance and low tdp go with nvidia..
Linus say this crap, Linus is wrong, i can play cs go on ultra with this.
This GPU should have never been labeled a R7 series card! The R7 240 is only slightly better than a crap GT520/GT610, It is amazing how bad the performance is with the R7 250 and R7 240. The R7 250X is not bad, But the 260X should have had the label of 250X and the R7 260 should have been labeled the R7 250, And the R7 250X should have been the R7 240. AMD did improve the mid and upper cards by doing that. But for some reason they lowered the performance of the low mid range cards. Why? Why? Some poor newbs probably paid around $80-$90 bucks for that crap card thinking they were getting performance close to the 7730 and then found out different. Hell they even have DDR3 versions of the lower R7 cards! WTH? The R7 Series is supposed to be for budget gamers, So this means the R7 series is considered to be gaming cards, So they should at'least have the common courtesy to provide GDDR5 V-Ram. AMD's R9 series is nice with the R9 270/270X and (R9 280/280X before they messed up by replacing 3GB cards with a 2GB R9 285 of similar performance, Kinda bizarre! Because the R9 285 is really not much faster, And it will actually loose out to the 280/280X cards in higher resolutions! So it makes no sense to do customers like that! When you pay around $250 you should get a card that has more than 2GB, Because what would be the point? You may as well get a R9 270/270X for cheaper. The reason people pay more is because they want higher resolution or multi monitors. And the R9 285 can't do it with only 2GB! But the R9 290/290X, And the King of all cards the R9 295X2, And the R7 265 and R7 260/260X are also great performers for the price.
comments powered by Disqus