Latest News Posts

Social
Latest Forum Posts

ASUS GeForce 210, GT 220 & GT 240
Bookmark and Share

asus_geforce_gt_240_012510.jpg
Print
by Rob Williams on January 25, 2010 in NVIDIA-Based GPU

This past fall, NVIDIA filled out the remainder of its GT200 series of graphics cards with three models. For basic computing, there’s the $40 GeForce 210, while for those looking to get a bit of light gaming done, there’s the $60 GT 220. And to round things off, there’s the $90 GT 240, which handles all of today’s games rather well at 1080p.

F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin

Five out of the seven current games we use for testing are either sequels, or titles in an established series. F.E.A.R. 2 is one of the former, following up on the very popular First Encounter Assault Recon, released in fall of 2005. This horror-based first-person shooter brought to the table fantastic graphics, ultra-smooth gameplay, the ability to blow massive chunks out of anything, and also a very fun multi-player mode.

Three-and-a-half years later, we saw the introduction of the game’s sequel, Project Origin. As we had hoped, this title improved on the original where gameplay and graphics were concerned, and it was a no-brainer to want to begin including it in our testing. The game is gorgeous, and there’s much destruction to be had (who doesn’t love blowing expensive vases to pieces?). The game is also rather heavily scripted, which aides in producing repeatable results in our benchmarking.

Manual Run-through: The level used for our testing here is the first in the game, about ten minutes in. The scene begins with a travel up an elevator, with a robust city landscape behind us. Our run-through begins with a quick look at this cityscape, and then we proceed through the level until the point when we reach the far door as seen in the above screenshot.

At 1024×768, F.E.A.R. 2 was fairly playable on all of our above configurations, with 1280×1024 running well on the GT 220. The performance overall sure isn’t anything worth bragging about, but for such a great-looking game, the performance we saw wasn’t too bad.

The trend continues, with our GT 240 falling well behind the HD 5670. F.E.A.R. 2, like Call of Juarez, seems to favor AMD, but the differences here are still rather stark even so.

Graphics Card
Best Playable
Min FPS
Avg. FPS
NVIDIA GTX 295 1792MB (Reference)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
45
95.767
ATI HD 5870 1GB (Reference)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
65
91.34
ATI HD 5850 1GB (ASUS)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
51
73.647
NVIDIA GTX 285 1GB (EVGA)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
39
62.014
NVIDIA GTX 275 896MB (Reference)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
37
57.266
NVIDIA GTX 260 896MB (XFX)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
29
48.110
ATI HD 5770 1GB (Reference)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
31
47.411
ATI HD 5750 1GB (Sapphire)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 16xAF
27
39.563
NVIDIA GTX 250 1GB (EVGA)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
24
36.331
ATI HD 5670 512MB (Reference)
1920×1080 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
31
46.87
NVIDIA GT 240 512MB (ASUS)
1920×1080 – Max Detail, 0xAA
30
45.039
NVIDIA GT 220 1GB (ASUS)
1280×1024 – Medium Detail, 0xAA
22
29.869
NVIDIA 210 512MB (ASUS)
1280×1024 – Low Detail, 0xAA
17
28.569
Intel HD Graphics (Clarkdale)
1280×1024 – Low Detail, 0xAA
20
34.388

Like some of the previous titles, the GT 240 performed well enough to hold onto the same settings we used for testing above, while the rest of the cards had to see notched-down settings before we could consider the game to be playable.