GeForce GT 440 vs Radeon HD 7650A
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 7650A and GeForce GT 440, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GT 440 outperforms HD 7650A by a substantial 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 940 | 848 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.23 | 0.07 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Fermi (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Onega | GF108 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 5 January 2012 (12 years ago) | 1 February 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $262 | $79 |
| Current price | $46 (0.2x MSRP) | $160 (2x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
HD 7650A has 229% better value for money than GT 440.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 480 | 96 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 96 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 810 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 716 million | 585 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 98 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 14.40 | 13.0 billion/sec |
| Floating-point performance | 576.0 gflops | 311.04 gflops |
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).
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 |
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 5.7" (14.5 cm) |
| Height | no data | 4.376" (11.1 cm) |
| Width | MXM Module | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 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 | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB GDDR5 or 1 GB |
| Standard memory config per GPU | no data | 1 GB GDDR5 or 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1600 MHz (GDDR5) or 900 MHz (DDR3) |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.8 GB/s | 28.8 (DDR3) – 51.2 (GDDR5) |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | HDMIVGADual Link DVI |
| Multi monitor support | no data | + |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | Internal |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.2 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | no data | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
GeForce GT 440 outperforms Radeon HD 7650A by 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
GeForce GT 440 outperforms Radeon HD 7650A by 35% in Passmark.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.48 | 1.99 |
| Recency | 5 January 2012 | 1 February 2011 |
| Cost | $262 | $79 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB GDDR5 or 1 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 65 Watt |
The GeForce GT 440 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7650A in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
