AMD Radeon R7 M440 vs AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile Comparison

The AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile and the AMD Radeon R7 M440 are both end-of-life AMD mobile graphics solutions, but they represent very different design philosophies: an integrated GPU built on a modern process node versus a dedicated entry-level card built on an older one. The database records one head-to-head benchmark result between them, and it is decisive. The Vega 10 Mobile wins the Geekbench OpenCL test 6476 to 5214, a 24.2 percent margin, and the rest of the spec sheet explains why the gap is that large. This comparison walks through the benchmark result, the architectural gulf between the two chips, and which kinds of systems each one actually suits.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and it goes to the Vega 10 Mobile by a wide margin: 6476 versus 5214, a 24.2 percent lead. That is not a rounding-error difference, it is a full performance class. A 24 percent gap in a general compute benchmark translates directly into smoother results in GPU workloads, whether that is gaming, media processing, or OpenCL-accelerated applications.

Context from the percentile data reinforces the result. The Vega 10 Mobile sits in the 37th percentile against all GPUs in the database, while the R7 M440 sits in the 32nd percentile. Five percentile points may sound small, but in the crowded low-end segment of the market, where thousands of near-identical chips cluster together, that separation is meaningful. The Vega 10 Mobile is simply a higher-tier performer.

The rivals each chip attracts also tell a story. The Vega 10 Mobile scores within a fraction of a percent of the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M (6481, a delta of only -0.1 percent), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (6493, -0.3 percent), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M (6513, -0.6 percent). Landing statistically alongside workstation-class and mid-tier dedicated notebook GPUs of a prior era is a strong showing for an integrated solution drawing a fraction of the power. The R7 M440 clusters with the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (5467, +0.3 percent), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M (5501, -0.3 percent), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (5508, -0.5 percent), along with the AMD Radeon 610M (5444, +0.7 percent). That is a lower-performance neighborhood, populated by entry-level dedicated cards and modern low-end integrated graphics.

Note also what the database does not contain: a Vulkan result for the Vega 10 Mobile. The R7 M440 has a recorded Geekbench Vulkan score of 5751, which is actually higher than its own OpenCL score of 5214, suggesting the older chip punches slightly above its OpenCL standing in Vulkan workloads. Without a matching Vega 10 Vulkan number, no direct cross-comparison can be made on that API, so the OpenCL result remains the definitive head-to-head data point.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two is substantial, and it spans three GPU generations. The Vega 10 Mobile is built on the Raven-M chip using GCN 5.0 architecture, part of the Vega IGP family from the Raven Ridge-M generation, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The R7 M440 uses the Meso chip on GCN 3.0 architecture, from the Gem System generation (R7 M400), fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. Two full process-node shrinks separate them, and the consequences show up everywhere in the data.

Start with density. The Vega 10 Mobile packs 4,940 million transistors into a 210 mm² die, for a density of 23.5 million transistors per square millimeter. The R7 M440 has 1,550 million transistors in 125 mm², or 12.4 million per square millimeter. The Vega part has roughly triple the transistor count and nearly double the density, which is exactly what you expect moving from 28 nm to 14 nm.

Compute resources follow the same pattern. The Vega 10 Mobile has 640 shading units and 40 texture mapping units, versus 320 shading units and 20 TMUs on the R7 M440. Both chips have 8 render output units, so the ROP count is the one place they are equal. Doubling the shaders and TMUs is the primary driver of the throughput advantage: the Vega 10 Mobile delivers 1.665 TFLOPS of FP32 compute against 570.2 GFLOPS on the R7 M440, nearly a threefold advantage. FP16 highlights another generational difference: the Vega 10 Mobile manages 3.331 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 rate, while the R7 M440 runs FP16 at 1:1, meaning no FP16 benefit at all, stuck at 570.2 GFLOPS.

The throughput numbers echo this. Pixel rate is 10.41 GPixel/s on the Vega versus 7.128 GPixel/s on the R7 M440, and texture rate is 52.04 GTexel/s versus 17.82 GTexel/s. The texture advantage is nearly 3x, which matters for fill-rate-sensitive gaming workloads.

Memory design is where the two philosophies diverge most sharply. The Vega 10 Mobile is an integrated GPU with system-shared memory: size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent, which means performance varies with the host notebook's RAM configuration. The R7 M440 is a dedicated card with its own 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, running at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) for 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. Dedicated memory guarantees a floor of consistency, but 14.40 GB/s is very low by any standard, and modern dual-channel system memory in a well-configured Vega 10 system can be competitive or better.

Clock behavior also differs. The Vega 10 Mobile has a recorded base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1301 MHz, while the R7 M440's compute clocks are not recorded in the database, only its memory clocks. API support favors the newer chip as well: DirectX 12 at feature level 12_1 versus 12_0, and Vulkan 1.3 versus Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Power and integration differ fundamentally. The Vega 10 Mobile is a true IGP with a 10 W TDP, no power connectors, and no slot width, whereas the R7 M440 connects over PCIe 3.0 x8 despite also being classified as IGP-width in the database. The Vega 10 Mobile succeeds to the Navi II IGP line and follows the GCN 3.0 IGP; the R7 M440 follows the Solar System generation and precedes Polaris Mobile.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in benchmarks?

A: The Vega 10 Mobile. It wins the Geekbench OpenCL head-to-head 6476 to 5214, a 24.2 percent margin, and holds a higher database-wide percentile (37th versus 32nd).

Q: How much more raw compute does the Vega 10 Mobile have?

A: 1.665 TFLOPS FP32 versus 570.2 GFLOPS FP32, close to a 3x advantage. In FP16 the gap widens further: 3.331 TFLOPS at a 2:1 rate versus 570.2 GFLOPS at 1:1.

Q: Does the R7 M440 have its own memory?

A: Yes, 4 GB of dedicated DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 10 Mobile shares system memory, so its bandwidth depends entirely on the host system's RAM.

Q: Which is newer?

A: The Vega 10 Mobile, released 2019-01-07, versus the R7 M440's release date of 2016-05-14. Both are now end-of-life products.

Q: Which supports more modern graphics features?

A: The Vega 10 Mobile: DirectX 12 (12_1) versus 12 (12_0), and Vulkan 1.3 versus Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: How power-efficient is the Vega 10 Mobile?

A: It carries a 10 W TDP as a fully integrated solution with no power connectors, which is inherently efficient since no dedicated memory or card power is needed.

Specification Differences

• Chip: Raven-M (Vega 10 Mobile) versus Meso (R7 M440)
• Architecture: GCN 5.0 versus GCN 3.0
• Generation: Vega IGP (Raven Ridge-M) versus Gem System (R7 M400)
• Process node: 14 nm at GlobalFoundries versus 28 nm at TSMC
• Transistors: 4,940 million versus 1,550 million
• Die size: 210 mm² versus 125 mm²
• Transistor density: 23.5M/mm² versus 12.4M/mm²
• Shading units: 640 versus 320
• TMUs: 40 versus 20
• ROPs: 8 on both, no difference
• Pixel rate: 10.41 GPixel/s versus 7.128 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 52.04 GTexel/s versus 17.82 GTexel/s
• FP32: 1.665 TFLOPS versus 570.2 GFLOPS
• FP16: 3.331 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 570.2 GFLOPS (1:1)
• Clocks: 300 MHz base, 1301 MHz boost on the Vega 10 Mobile; not recorded for the R7 M440
• Memory: system-shared on the Vega 10 Mobile versus 4 GB DDR3, 64-bit, 14.40 GB/s on the R7 M440
• TDP: 10 W (Vega 10 Mobile) versus not recorded (R7 M440)
• Bus interface: IGP versus PCIe 3.0 x8
• APIs: DirectX 12_1 / Vulkan 1.3 versus DirectX 12_0 / Vulkan 1.2.170
• Release date: 2019-01-07 versus 2016-05-14
• Predecessor/successor: GCN 3.0 IGP to Navi II IGP versus Solar System to Polaris Mobile

Where Each One Wins

The Vega 10 Mobile wins essentially every contest the data can stage. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 24.2 percent, it wins on raw compute by nearly 3x in FP32 and much more in FP16, it wins on pixel fill rate and texture throughput, it wins on API support, and it wins on process technology and efficiency thanks to its 10 W integrated design. For gaming, the doubled shader and TMU counts plus the 52.04 GTexel/s texture rate make it the clearly stronger choice. For compute workloads, the FP16 advantage at a 2:1 rate adds a capability the R7 M440 simply lacks. For modern software compatibility, Vulkan 1.3 and feature level 12_1 give it the edge.

The R7 M440's wins are narrower and structural rather than performance-based. Its 4 GB of dedicated DDR3 means memory capacity and bandwidth are fixed and predictable, independent of system RAM configuration, whereas Vega 10 Mobile performance varies with the host platform. Its recorded Vulkan score of 5751 exceeding its own OpenCL score shows it performs respectably in that API, and it brackets with rivals like the GeForce MX130 and Radeon 610M. And its PCIe 3.0 x8 interface means it can be added to systems as a discrete option rather than being soldered into the platform.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the Vega 10 Mobile is the better graphics solution in every measurable performance dimension. It is 24.2 percent faster in the only direct benchmark, delivers nearly triple the FP32 compute, doubles the shaders and TMUs, and offers newer API support, all while integrated into the CPU package at a 10 W TDP with no dedicated memory subsystem to power. Anyone choosing between systems containing these two parts for gaming or GPU compute should pick the Vega 10 Mobile without hesitation.

The R7 M440 makes sense only in contexts the benchmarks do not capture: a platform that needs a discrete card over PCIe, or a deployment where guaranteed dedicated memory capacity matters more than throughput. Its own numbers are not bad in absolute terms, it lands within a point of the Quadro M4000 and GTX 765M in the database rankings, but against the Vega 10 Mobile it is outclassed on every metric recorded. Both chips are end-of-life, so this comparison mainly matters when evaluating used hardware, and in that evaluation the data points one direction clearly: the Vega 10 Mobile.