#NVIDIA GT 240 DRIVER 3.61 FULL#

* Pure Video 4th and 5th generation (VP4/5). * Small card (eVGA's card is even 1 slot) asusmaun - Wednesday, Janulink Hi! I think the GT 240 models with GDDR5 are extremely sweet and I want to get one.It becomes readily apparent here that the clock speeds of the GT 240 were picked by NVIDIA to meet the PCIe power limit rather than the capabilities of the GPU itself. If indeed that card is at or close to 70W under normal circumstances as NVIDIAвЂ™s specifications call for, then when overclocked itвЂ™s over 90W. As we mentioned previously only the EVGA card behaved correctly when overclocking вЂ“ in overclocking that card we saw a 21W jump from 172W under load to 193W under load. Meanwhile the Asus is 14% faster than stock, even with its more limited shader overclock.ДЇinally, on a quick note weвЂ™ll talk about power usage. The overclocked EVGA card is some 19% faster than a stock GT 240, and 5% faster than the overclocked Asus.

#NVIDIA GT 240 DRIVER 3.61 FULL#

Our cards are still suffering from RAM limitations, but itвЂ™s still enough to get another 10% out of the EVGA card.ДЇinally with Battleforge we can see a full stratification of results.

When it comes to Far Cry 2, the significant shader speed differences finally make themselves more apparent. ItвЂ™s a shame that the GT 240вЂ™s core doesnвЂ™t overclock more than the shaders, as given the ROP weakness weвЂ™d rather have more core clockspeed than shader clockspeed in our overclocking efforts. More interestingly, theyвЂ™re only a few tenths of a frame apart, even though the EVGA card has its shaders clocked significantly higher.ДЄs the performance difference almost perfectly matches the core overclock, this makes Crysis an excellent candidate for proving that the GT 240 can be ROP-bound. Compared to a stock GT 240, our overclocked Asus and EVGA cards get roughly 15% and 17% more performance. In any case, the significant shader overclocking should be quite beneficial in what shader-bound situations exist for the GT 240.Д¬rysis gives us some very interesting results when overclocked, and this data helps cement the idea that Crysis is ROP-bound on the GT 240. This is an improvement of 18%, 11%, and 27% respectively.Д¬ompared to our Asus card, we do not get any anomalous power readings when attempting to overclock it, so if our GPU core voltage theory is correct, then this would explain why the two cards overclocked so differently. However it does fit all of our data, and makes even more sense once we look at the EVGA card.ДЇor the EVGA card, we managed to bring it to 650MHz core, 4000MHz RAM, and 1700MHz shader clock.

We suspect that the voltage on the GPU core is being reduced when the card is overclocked, however thereвЂ™s currently no way to read the GPU voltage of a GT 240, so we canвЂ™t confirm this. When we attempt to define custom clock speeds on it, our watt meter shows the power usage of our test rig dropping by a few watts, which under normal circumstances doesnвЂ™t make any sense. We believe that this card is actually capable of more, but we have encountered an interesting quirk with it. This is an improvement of 16%, 17%, and 10% respectively. So with that in mind, we took to overclocking our two GDDR5 cards: The Asus GT 240 512MB GDDR5, and the EVGA GT 240 512MB GDDR5 Superclocked.ДЇor the Asus card, we managed to bring it to 640MHz core, 4000MHz RAM, and 1475MHz shader clock. If the memory bus can hold up, then thatвЂ™s a freebie overclock. The Samsung chips on those cards are rated for 4000MHz effective, some 17% more than the stock speed of 3400MHz effective. The DDR3 card is a lost cause anyhow thanks to its low performance and the fact that itвЂ™s only 10MHz below its RAMвЂ™s rated limit, but the GDDR5 cards have great potential. Based on the lower core and shader clock speeds of the GT 240 compared to the GT 220 (not to mention the 8800 GT) we believe it to be a reasonable assumption that the GPU is capable of a great deal more, so long as youвЂ™re willing to throw the 75W limit out the window. As we briefly mentioned in the introduction, the GT 240 has a 70W TDP, one we believe to be chosen specifically to get as much out of the card as possible without breaking the 75W limit of a PCIe slot.

Nvidia gt 240 driver 3.61