Quadro NVS 440 vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4550
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 4550 with Quadro NVS 440, including specs and performance data.
Mobility HD 4550 outperforms NVS 440 by a whopping 289% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1352 | 1525 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 0.22 |
| Architecture | Terascale 1 (2010) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | M92 | NV43 A4 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 January 2010 (16 years ago) | 14 February 2006 (20 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $96.99 |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 80 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 250 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 242 million | 146 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 110 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 31 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.400 | 2.000 ×2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.088 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 8 ×2 |
| TMUs | 8 | 8 ×2 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | MXM-II | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 187 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR3, DDR2, DDR3 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 128 MB ×2 |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit ×2 |
| Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | 250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 11.2 GB/s | 8 GB/s ×2 |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DMS-59 |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 10
+400%
| 2−3
−400%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 48.50 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+333%
|
6−7
−333%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
+367%
|
3−4
−367%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+333%
|
6−7
−333%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+333%
|
6−7
−333%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+367%
|
3−4
−367%
|
| Valorant | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
This is how ATI Mobility HD 4550 and NVS 440 compete in popular games:
- ATI Mobility HD 4550 is 400% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.35 | 0.09 |
| Recency | 1 January 2010 | 14 February 2006 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 128 MB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 110 nm |
ATI Mobility HD 4550 has a 289% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Mobility Radeon HD 4550 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 440 in performance tests.
Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 4550 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro NVS 440 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
