AMD Radeon R7 240 vs AMD Radeon R7 M440 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 M440 and the AMD Radeon R7 240 are both end-of-life, 28 nm parts from AMD, but they target different segments and deliver measurably different performance. The data shows the M440 holds a clear, albeit modest, performance lead in the only direct benchmark comparison available, while the R7 240 counters with a wider memory bus and a higher transistor density per square millimeter. This analysis breaks down the head-to-head results, architectural differences, and specific use cases where each GPU is the more sensible choice based strictly on the provided benchmark data and specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the data is a single Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are unambiguous. The AMD Radeon R7 M440 scores 5214 points, while the AMD Radeon R7 240 scores 5063 points. This gives the M440 a 3% performance advantage, a win that is consistent with its higher average benchmark score of 5483 compared to the R7 240’s 5063. While 3% is not a dramatic gap, it is a definitive lead in this specific test, indicating that the M440 is the faster GPU for general compute workloads as measured by OpenCL.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the M440’s performance is tightly clustered with several other mobile and workstation parts. Its average score of 5483 places it just 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (5467) and 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon 610M (5444). It sits slightly behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M (5501) and NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (5508) by 0.3% and 0.5%, respectively. This indicates that the M440 is a mid-pack performer, and its 3% lead over the R7 240 is consistent with its overall 32nd percentile ranking among all GPUs, compared to the R7 240’s 30th percentile. The R7 240’s score of 5063, meanwhile, places it in a tie with the AMD Radeon R7 M340, and it is just 0.6% ahead of the AMD FirePro W4170M (5034). The performance difference between the two cards, while real, is not transformative; it represents a single tier of separation rather than a generational leap.

The Geekbench Vulkan score for the M440 is 5751, which is higher than its OpenCL score. No Vulkan score is provided for the R7 240, so a direct comparison is impossible, but this higher score suggests the M440’s architecture handles the Vulkan API more efficiently than OpenCL. The R7 240’s lack of a Vulkan benchmark result in the data does not necessarily indicate a deficiency, but it limits a full performance profile. When considering the wins tally, the M440 wins the only head-to-head test, giving it 1 win against 0 for the R7 240.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M440 is faster, scoring 5214 compared to the AMD Radeon R7 240’s 5063, a 3% difference.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The M440’s average score of 5483 is nearly identical to the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (5467), while the R7 240’s average score of 5063 is exactly tied with the AMD Radeon R7 M340.

Q: Does the R7 240 have any performance advantage over the M440?

A: No, the benchmark data shows no test where the R7 240 wins. The M440 leads in the sole head-to-head Geekbench OpenCL test.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The R7 240 has a significantly higher memory bandwidth of 28.80 GB/s due to its 128-bit bus, while the M440 has 14.40 GB/s from a 64-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 (single-precision) performance?

A: The M440 has higher FP32 performance at 570.2 GFLOPS, compared to the R7 240’s 499.2 GFLOPS.

Q: Are both GPUs the same physical size?

A: No, the R7 240 is a single-slot desktop card with dimensions of 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the M440 is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with dimensions listed as portable device dependent.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear verdict: the AMD Radeon R7 M440 is the superior performer. It wins the only direct benchmark, has a higher average benchmark score (5483 vs. 5063), and ranks higher in the overall percentile (32nd vs. 30th). For any user prioritizing raw compute performance as measured by OpenCL, the M440 is the definitive choice. Its 3% lead in the head-to-head test is small but consistent with its higher FP32 throughput (570.2 GFLOPS vs. 499.2 GFLOPS) and pixel/texture rates (7.128 GPixel/s and 17.82 GTexel/s vs. 6.240 GPixel/s and 15.60 GTexel/s).

However, the R7 240 is not without merit. Its 128-bit memory bus provides 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth, exactly double the M440’s 14.40 GB/s. This is a significant architectural advantage that could benefit memory-intensive workloads, even if the raw compute scores are lower. The R7 240 is also a desktop single-slot card with a 30 W TDP and no power connectors, making it a drop-in solution for basic systems, whereas the M440 is an IGP soldered onto a motherboard. For a user building a low-power desktop rig with a focus on memory bandwidth, the R7 240 is the only option that fits the form factor. For everyone else, the M440’s benchmark win makes it the better pick.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several key specifications, starting with their memory subsystems. The M440 has 4 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 240 has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 28.80 GB/s. The R7 240’s memory clock is the same at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), so the bandwidth difference is entirely due to the bus width. In terms of core configuration, both have 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, so the compute pipeline is identical in size. The clock speeds differ, with the R7 240 having a base clock of 730 MHz and a boost clock of 780 MHz, while the M440 has no listed base or boost clocks, only a memory clock.

The R7 240 has a TDP of 30 W and requires a suggested PSU of 200 W, while the M440’s TDP is not listed. The R7 240 is a single-slot card with dimensions of 168 mm by 69 mm, while the M440 is an IGP. The R7 240 has display outputs of 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x VGA, whereas the M440’s outputs are listed as portable device dependent. The R7 240 has a launch MSRP of 69 USD. The R7 240 also has a larger transistor count of 950 million on a 77 mm² die, while the M440 has 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, resulting in nearly identical transistor densities (12.3M / mm² vs. 12.4M / mm²).

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is clear: the M440 is based on GCN 3.0 with the Meso chip, while the R7 240 is based on the older GCN 1.0 with the Oland chip. This generational gap is reflected in their API support. The M440 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and lists FP16 performance at 570.2 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the R7 240 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and has no listed FP16 capability. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. The M440 is part of the Gem System (R7 M400) generation, while the R7 240 is from the Volcanic Islands (R7 200) generation.

The M440’s newer GCN 3.0 architecture is the primary reason for its higher clock-for-clock performance, as it allows for better instruction scheduling and feature support. The R7 240’s GCN 1.0 architecture is older but still functional for basic tasks. The M440 also has a higher transistor count (1,550 million vs. 950 million) on a larger die (125 mm² vs. 77 mm²), which contributes to its higher FP32 output. The R7 240’s 128-bit memory interface is a separate design choice that compensates for its older core by providing more memory bandwidth. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process, so the manufacturing technology is identical; the performance gap comes from the architecture generation and core configuration.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 M440 wins in scenarios that demand raw compute performance. Its higher FP32 throughput, texture rate, and pixel rate make it better suited for general-purpose compute tasks, OpenCL workloads, and any application that can leverage its DirectX 12 (12_0) feature set. The data shows it is 3% faster in Geekbench OpenCL, and its higher average score suggests it will be consistently faster across similar tests. Its 4 GB of VRAM is double the R7 240’s 2 GB, which can help with larger texture sets or datasets, even though the memory bandwidth is lower. For a laptop or portable system where the M440 is integrated, it is the clear winner for gaming and productivity.

The AMD Radeon R7 240 wins in the specific niche of memory-bandwidth-bound tasks. Its 28.80 GB/s bandwidth is exactly double the M440’s, which is a substantial advantage for operations that are limited by data transfer rather than shader compute. This could include certain compute tasks, higher-resolution textures, or multi-tasking with multiple displays. The R7 240 is also the only choice for a desktop user needing a discrete, single-slot card with standard display outputs (DVI, HDMI, VGA). Its 30 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it an easy drop-in for older systems with limited PSU headroom. For a user whose primary need is memory bandwidth and a simple desktop form factor, the R7 240 is the correct pick, despite its lower overall benchmark score.