Legit Reviews

Well, since this card is strikingly similar to the GeForce 9600 GSO which was extremely popular for its folding performance, let's take a look at how well the GeForce GT 240 handles the Folding @ Home client in comparison. Below is a chart showing the time in minutes each percent took to complete on Project: 5766 (Run 3, Clone 156, Gen 905) using F@H Client Version 6.23 of GPU2.

Folding @ Home is a very difficult application to benchmark, as virtually any computer usage will impede results. The ever-changing project files provided by Stanford also make things difficult because you have to do all testing at one time since old units cannot be compared to new ones (certain work units can take up to 10 minutes to complete 1% on the cards above), which is why you don't see many reviews include such testing. This a core refresh of the famed budget Folding@Home performer, so we almost had to include such a section (and I was itching to see the results myself!).

*You will notice some time stamps add up to ~1:56 on the 9600 GSO and GT 240 at stock, which would make the average higher than it actually is. Well, that is because opening apps like GPUz or the notepad log file for F@H puts the GPU usage down a bit in an effort to keep the system from feeling laggy. To negate this, I simply threw out the completion times that were above 1:20 as almost all were between 1:11-1:15 for both cards.

At stock clocks on Project 5766, the AXLE GeForce GT 240 slightly outperformed its older brother, the GeForce 9600 GSO, but the difference is not that noticeable as each % completes only one second faster at best. Once overclocked to the same settings as shown in the previous section, the GT 240 becomes considerably faster, averaging a little over a minute and 3 seconds. This is a considerable improvement of ~15% over the GSO's 1:132 average as well as the 1:13 that the GT 240 puts out at stock.