AMD Radeon R7 M440 vs AMD Radeon RX 6400 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits decisively in favor of the AMD Radeon RX 6400. Out of the two shared test workloads recorded in the database, the RX 6400 claims both victories. The R7 M440 does not register a single win in any measurable category when directly compared.

The RX 6400 dominates in compute-oriented workloads. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scores 32,011 points against the R7 M440's 5,214 points, a delta of 513.9%. This gap is not incremental; it represents a completely different performance class. The RX 6400 also leads in Geekbench Vulkan, posting 16,372 points versus 5,751, a delta of 184.7%. Both tests stress raw shader throughput and memory bandwidth, areas where the architecture gap is most visible.

For the R7 M440, its only recorded benchmark appearances are these two Geekbench tests. There are no DirectX, PassMark, or compute entries in the database for it. The RX 6400, by contrast, has a full suite of ten benchmark results spanning DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, OpenCL, Vulkan, and 3DMark Steel Nomad. This means the RX 6400 can be evaluated across a wider range of API generations, while the R7 M440's profile is limited.

Looking at aggregate positions, the RX 6400 sits at the 35th percentile of all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 6,001. The R7 M440 sits at the 32nd percentile with an average of 5,483. The percentile difference is modest, but the average score gap of 518 points reflects the RX 6400's stronger absolute performance. The R7 M440's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (0.3% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M (0.3% faster than the R7 M440), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (0.5% faster), which places it in a crowded mid-low tier. The RX 6400, meanwhile, trades blows with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (0% delta), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server (0.1% faster), and the AMD FirePro W4100 (0.2% faster), a noticeably higher competitive bracket.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural generations, and the recorded data makes the consequences explicit. The RX 6400 uses the Navi 24 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process. It packs 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 50.5 million per square millimeter. The R7 M440 uses the Meso chip on GCN 3.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm TSMC process. It contains 1,550 million transistors across a 125 mm² die, for a density of 12.4 million per square millimeter. The density difference, a factor of roughly four, explains why the RX 6400 achieves so much more work per unit of silicon area.

The compute resources differ sharply. The RX 6400 has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It also includes 12 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the R7 M440. The R7 M440 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, roughly half the shader count and a quarter of the ROP count. The pixel rate tells the story: the RX 6400 outputs 74.27 GPixel/s, while the R7 M440 manages only 7.128 GPixel/s. Texture rate follows the same pattern, 111.4 GTexel/s versus 17.82 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture also diverges. Both use a 64-bit bus, but the RX 6400 pairs it with 4 GB of GDDR6 running at 16 Gbps effective, producing 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M440 uses 4 GB of DDR3 at 1800 Mbps effective, yielding just 14.40 GB/s. That is a ninefold bandwidth advantage for the RX 6400. The memory clock figures reflect this: 2000 MHz on the RX 6400 versus 900 MHz on the R7 M440.

The floating-point throughput shows the generational leap. The RX 6400 delivers 3.565 TFLOPS FP32 and 7.130 TFLOPS FP16 (at a 2:1 ratio). The R7 M440 delivers 570.2 GFLOPS FP32 and the same 570.2 GFLOPS FP16 (at a 1:1 ratio). The RX 6400 is roughly 6.25 times faster in FP32. API support also differs: the RX 6400 runs DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R7 M440 runs DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RX 6400 supports hardware ray tracing through its RT cores, while the R7 M440 has none.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 6400 is the superior part in every measurable dimension. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks by margins of 513.9% and 184.7%. It produces higher pixel and texture rates, has more shading units, and delivers dramatically more memory bandwidth. It also has a higher average benchmark score (6,001 versus 5,483) and a higher percentile rank (35th versus 32nd).

A buyer or system builder should choose the RX 6400 if they need any level of modern gaming or compute performance. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support, ray tracing cores, and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility make it suitable for contemporary workloads. Its 53 W TDP and single-slot design, with no power connectors required and a suggested 250 W PSU, indicate it can fit into compact or low-power systems. The R7 M440, by contrast, is an integrated-class part (labeled IGP) with a portable-device-dependent display output. It is not designed for discrete performance tasks.

The R7 M440 may still be relevant in one narrow context: legacy systems or low-power portable devices where its 28 nm GCN 3.0 architecture and DDR3 memory are already integrated. Its 4 GB frame buffer matches the RX 6400, so memory capacity is not a differentiator. But the bandwidth difference (14.40 GB/s versus 128.0 GB/s) makes the R7 M440 unsuitable for any texture-heavy or compute-intensive application. The data shows no scenario where the R7 M440 wins a benchmark against the RX 6400.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 has an average score of 6,001, while the AMD Radeon R7 M440 has an average score of 5,483.

Q: What is the performance gap in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The RX 6400 scores 32,011 against the R7 M440's 5,214, a delta of 513.9%.

Q: Does the R7 M440 have ray tracing cores?

A: No. The R7 M440 has no ray tracing cores listed, while the RX 6400 has 12 RT cores.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: The RX 6400 has 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth from GDDR6 memory, while the R7 M440 has 14.40 GB/s from DDR3 memory.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU?

A: For the RX 6400, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (0% delta), NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server (0.1% faster), AMD FirePro W4100 (0.2% faster), and NVIDIA Quadro K4000M (0.3% faster). For the R7 M440, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (0.3% faster), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M (0.3% faster than the R7 M440), NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (0.5% faster), and AMD Radeon 610M (0.7% faster than the R7 M440).

Q: Which GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The R7 M440 only supports DirectX 12 (12_0).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains exactly two shared benchmark tests between these GPUs, and both are decisive wins for the RX 6400.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6400 posts a score of 32,011. The R7 M440 manages 5,214. The delta is 513.9%. This test measures general-purpose compute performance across a range of OpenCL workloads, including memory-intensive kernels and floating-point operations. The RX 6400's 3.565 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 128.0 GB/s bandwidth explain the magnitude of this lead. The R7 M440's 570.2 GFLOPS and 14.40 GB/s bandwidth are simply outclassed. A score difference of this size is not a marginal victory; it places the R7 M440 in a different performance stratum.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6400 scores 16,372 against the R7 M440's 5,751. The delta is 184.7%. Vulkan is a lower-level API that can expose hardware efficiency differences more directly than OpenCL. The RX 6400's RDNA 2.0 architecture, with its 768 shading units and dedicated RT cores, allows it to leverage Vulkan 1.4 features. The R7 M440, running Vulkan 1.2.170 with only 320 shading units, falls far behind. The percentage gap is smaller than in OpenCL, but still overwhelming.

There are no other overlapping benchmarks in the recorded data. The RX 6400 has additional scores in 3DMark Steel Nomad (176), PassMark DirectX 10 (54), DirectX 11 (70), DirectX 12 (30), DirectX 9 (93), G2D (722), G3D (7,673), and GPU Compute (2,812). The R7 M440 has no entries for any of these tests. The wins count stands at 2 for the RX 6400 and 0 for the R7 M440.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs in the database:

• Chip and architecture: RX 6400 uses Navi 24 on RDNA 2.0; R7 M440 uses Meso on GCN 3.0.
• Process node: RX 6400 is 6 nm; R7 M440 is 28 nm, both from TSMC.
• Transistor count: RX 6400 has 5,400 million; R7 M440 has 1,550 million.
• Die size: RX 6400 is 107 mm²; R7 M440 is 125 mm².
• Transistor density: RX 6400 is 50.5M / mm²; R7 M440 is 12.4M / mm².
• Clock speeds: RX 6400 has a base of 1923 MHz, boost of 2321 MHz, and game clock of 2039 MHz; R7 M440 has no recorded base, boost, or game clocks. Memory clock: RX 6400 at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective); R7 M440 at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective).
• Memory type: RX 6400 uses GDDR6; R7 M440 uses DDR3.
• Memory bandwidth: RX 6400 at 128.0 GB/s; R7 M440 at 14.40 GB/s.
• Shading units: 768 vs 320.
• TMUs: 48 vs 20.
• ROPs: 32 vs 8.
• RT cores: 12 vs none.
• Pixel rate: 74.27 GPixel/s vs 7.128 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: 111.4 GTexel/s vs 17.82 GTexel/s.
• FP32: 3.565 TFLOPS vs 570.2 GFLOPS.
• FP16: 7.130 TFLOPS (2:1) vs 570.2 GFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: 53 W vs not recorded.
• Slot width: Single-slot vs IGP.
• Power connectors: None vs not recorded.
• Suggested PSU: 250 W vs not recorded.
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x4 vs PCIe 3.0 x8.
• Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a vs Portable Device Dependent.
• DirectX version: 12 Ultimate (12_2) vs 12 (12_0).
• Vulkan version: 1.4 vs 1.2.170.
• Release date: 2022-01-18 vs 2016-05-14.
• Launch MSRP: 159 USD for the RX 6400; no MSRP recorded for the R7 M440.