NVIDIA
GeForce GTS 240 vs GeForce Go 7300
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GeForce Go 7300
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GTS 240 and GeForce Go 7300 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗GTS 240 outperforms GeForce Go 7300 by ~11% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+11%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce GTS 240 (~53%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GTS 240
- Higher catalog performance index
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.2 · Not supported
Reasons to consider GeForce Go 7300
- Recorded feature support: CUDA / OpenCL 1.x · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAPerformance
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3128
10064
4343
Graphics card ranking
Positions 299–304of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce Go 7300
128 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
31Better
28
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
29Better
27
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
26Better
24
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
86Better
25
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
49Better
32
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Device class
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
DirectX
OpenGL
TFLOPS
Power consumption—
Process nodeBetter
Release date
Architecture
Memory type
Power connector
Thickness
Compute API
HDMI
Launch price—
Shader units / cores
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumption—
Recommended PSU
Length
Die sizeBetter
Transistor countBetter
Memory cache
Vulkan
Upscaling
DisplayPort
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GTS 240 and GeForce Go 7300 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GTS 240GeForce Go 7300
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
152 FPS
143 FPS
1080p Ultra
107 FPS
101 FPS
1440p Ultra
60 FPS
54 FPS
4K Ultra
23 FPS
19 FPS
Counter-Strike 2GTS 240152 FPSGeForce Go 7300143 FPSGTS 240107 FPSGeForce Go 7300101 FPSGTS 24060 FPSGeForce Go 730054 FPSGTS 24023 FPSGeForce Go 730019 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077GTS 24098 FPSGeForce Go 730093 FPSGTS 24085 FPSGeForce Go 730080 FPSGTS 24043 FPSGeForce Go 730039 FPSGTS 24015 FPSGeForce Go 730013 FPS
Forza Horizon 5GTS 240124 FPSGeForce Go 7300117 FPSGTS 24080 FPSGeForce Go 730076 FPSGTS 24054 FPSGeForce Go 730049 FPSGTS 24033 FPSGeForce Go 730029 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyGTS 24080 FPSGeForce Go 730076 FPSGTS 24067 FPSGeForce Go 730063 FPSGTS 24039 FPSGeForce Go 730035 FPSGTS 24015 FPSGeForce Go 730013 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100312810%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100322813%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10034326%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10043430%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 100860200%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 10036353%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10036346%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10034326%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10038365%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10035336%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX10.19.3
VulkanNot supportedNot supported
OpenGL3.32.1
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.2CUDA / OpenCL 1.x
Architecture and release
ArchitectureTesla 2.0Curie
Process node55 nmBetter90 nm
Release date20092006
Device classDesktopMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count727 millionBetter112 million
Die size144 mm²81 mm²Better
Shader units / cores96Not publicly specified
Base clock675 MHzBetter350 MHz
Boost clock675 MHzBetter350 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 2x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length168 mmOEM dependent
ThicknessSingle-slotOEM dependent
Recommended PSU250 WOEM dependent
Power connector6 pinNone
Display outputs and limits
HDMIHDMIOEM dependent
DisplayPortBoard dependentOEM dependent
USB Type-CNoOEM dependent
Max monitors3OEM dependent
Max resolution2560 × 1600OEM dependent
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM1 GB GDDR3Better0.064 GB GDDR3
Memory typeGDDR3GDDR3 / DDR2
Memory bus256 bitBetter64 bit
TFLOPS0.257Not published (legacy architecture)
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 67
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (3)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (3)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GTS 240 or GeForce Go 7300?+
GTS 240 has the higher overall gaming score, while GTS 240 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GTS 240 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GTS 240 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GTS 240 offers more overall performance, while GTS 240 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GTS 240 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GTS 240 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GTS 240 leads in combined 1440p performance. GTS 240 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GTS 240 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GTS 240 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GTS 240 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GTS 240 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.