AMD Radeon R7 M440 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Comparison

NVIDIA Quadro P2000 vs AMD Radeon R7 M440: the data shows a decisive sweep, with the Quadro P2000 winning both recorded head-to-head tests by margins of 286% and 309.8%. The Radeon R7 M440, an integrated part from an older generation, trails in every measurable category, making the Quadro P2000 the clear choice for any workload where compute or graphics performance matters.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 wins every benchmark category where both GPUs have recorded scores. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P2000 scores 20125 against 5214 for the Radeon R7 M440, a 286% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, the margin is even larger: 23566 versus 5751, a 309.8% advantage. The data contains no test where the AMD part comes out ahead.

The Radeon R7 M440 has no winning categories in the database. Its only recorded benchmarks are the two Geekbench tests, and it loses both by a wide margin. The Quadro P2000 also holds a higher average benchmark score of 6049 versus 5483 for the Radeon. In terms of percentile ranking, the Quadro sits at the 35th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon sits at the 32nd, a modest gap that understates the scale of the head-to-head losses because the Radeon has fewer recorded tests.

Where the Radeon R7 M440 might fit is in its intended form factor: it is an integrated part (IGP) with no power connectors, designed for portable devices. The Quadro P2000, by contrast, is a single-slot discrete card with four DisplayPort outputs. The data shows that for any task involving OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the Quadro P2000 is the only rational choice between these two.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural eras. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 uses the GP106 chip built on the Pascal architecture, manufactured on a 16 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon R7 M440 uses the Meso chip on GCN 3.0, built on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. The node difference is substantial: 16 nm versus 28 nm, which helps explain the large gap in transistor density. The Quadro packs 4,400 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, for a density of 22.0M per mm². The Radeon has 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, for 12.4M per mm².

Memory configurations differ sharply. The Quadro P2000 has 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 160-bit bus, delivering 140.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R7 M440 has 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, at 14.40 GB/s. That is a nearly 10x difference in memory bandwidth, which directly impacts compute and texture-heavy workloads. The Quadro's memory clock is listed at 1752 MHz with 7 Gbps effective, while the Radeon's is 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective.

Compute resources favor the Quadro heavily. It has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. The Radeon has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel rate is 59.20 GPixel/s for the Quadro versus 7.128 GPixel/s for the Radeon. Texture rate is 94.72 GTexel/s versus 17.82 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 3.031 TFLOPS versus 570.2 GFLOPS. Interestingly, FP16 performance flips: the Quadro manages only 47.36 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), while the Radeon achieves 570.2 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio). That makes the Radeon technically better at FP16 compute, though its overall FP32 capability is far lower.

The Quadro P2000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Quadro also has a wider bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x8 for the Radeon.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 is the superior GPU in every head-to-head test recorded. Its 286% lead in OpenCL and 309.8% lead in Vulkan are not small margins; they represent a completely different performance class. The Quadro P2000 is a discrete workstation card with 1024 shading units, 5 GB of GDDR5, and 140.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R7 M440 is an integrated part with 320 shading units, 4 GB of DDR3, and 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth.

Who should pick the Quadro P2000? Anyone running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads on a desktop workstation. The Quadro's four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also make it suitable for multi-monitor setups. It requires a 250 W suggested PSU and draws a 75 W TDP, with no external power connectors needed.

Who should pick the Radeon R7 M440? The only scenario supported by the data is a portable device where an integrated GPU is the only option. Its IGP slot width and lack of power connectors confirm its mobile orientation. But the performance data offers no reason to choose it over the Quadro P2000 in any direct comparison.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the verdict: 6049 for the Quadro versus 5483 for the Radeon. The Quadro's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (6077, 0.5% ahead), the NVIDIA RTX A400 (6078, 0.5% ahead), the AMD Radeon 760M (6019, 0.5% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6001, 0.8% behind). The Radeon R7 M440's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (5467, 0.3% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M (5501, 0.3% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (5508, 0.5% ahead), and the AMD Radeon 610M (5444, 0.7% behind). The Quadro competes in a higher performance tier entirely.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 20125 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon R7 M440 scores 5214. That is a 286% advantage for the Quadro.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R7 M440 win any benchmark?

A: No. The database records two head-to-head tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the Radeon loses both.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Quadro P2000 has 140.2 GB/s of bandwidth from 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 160-bit bus. The Radeon R7 M440 has 14.40 GB/s from 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU is better for Vulkan workloads?

A: The Quadro P2000 scores 23566 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 5751 for the Radeon R7 M440, a 309.8% lead.

Q: What are the form factor differences?

A: The Quadro P2000 is a single-slot, 196 mm long, 111 mm high discrete card with four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The Radeon R7 M440 is an IGP with no dimensions listed and outputs described as portable device dependent.

Q: How do the architectures compare?

A: The Quadro P2000 uses the Pascal architecture on a 16 nm process with a GP106 chip. The Radeon R7 M440 uses GCN 3.0 on a 28 nm process with a Meso chip.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two head-to-head tests in the database are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the Quadro P2000 wins both by enormous margins.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P2000 records 20125 points. The Radeon R7 M440 records 5214 points. The delta is 286% in favor of the Quadro. This test exercises general compute workloads, and the gap reflects the underlying hardware differences: 1024 shading units versus 320, 140.2 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and 3.031 TFLOPS versus 570.2 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the Quadro P2000 scores 23566, while the Radeon R7 M440 scores 5751. The delta is 309.8%, the largest margin in the dataset. Vulkan performance often scales with driver maturity and hardware feature support. The Quadro supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon supports Vulkan 1.2.170. The Quadro's PCIe 3.0 x16 interface also provides twice the bus bandwidth of the Radeon's PCIe 3.0 x8.

Beyond the head-to-head tests, the Quadro P2000 has a broader benchmark profile. It records scores in Passmark DirectX 10 (34), DirectX 11 (47), DirectX 12 (28), DirectX 9 (124), G2D (626), G3D (6956), and GPU compute (2933). The Radeon R7 M440 has no Passmark scores in the database. This limits direct comparison, but the available data consistently favors the Quadro.

The average benchmark score tells the same story. The Quadro averages 6049 across its recorded tests, placing it at the 35th percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon averages 5483, at the 32nd percentile. The Quadro's nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce MX230, scores 6077, just 0.5% higher. The Radeon's nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce MX130, scores 5508, 0.5% higher than the Radeon. These rival positions show that the Quadro sits in a performance neighborhood roughly 10% above the Radeon's, even before accounting for the lopsided head-to-head results.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification field recorded.

Process node: The Quadro P2000 uses 16 nm, the Radeon R7 M440 uses 28 nm. Both are TSMC.

Transistors: Quadro has 4,400 million, Radeon has 1,550 million.

Die size: Quadro is 200 mm², Radeon is 125 mm².

Transistor density: Quadro is 22.0M per mm², Radeon is 12.4M per mm².

Memory: Quadro has 5 GB GDDR5, Radeon has 4 GB DDR3.

Memory bus: Quadro is 160-bit, Radeon is 64-bit.

Memory bandwidth: Quadro is 140.2 GB/s, Radeon is 14.40 GB/s.

Memory clock: Quadro is 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective), Radeon is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective).

Shading units: Quadro has 1024, Radeon has 320.

TMUs: Quadro has 64, Radeon has 20.

ROPs: Quadro has 40, Radeon has 8.

Pixel rate: Quadro is 59.20 GPixel/s, Radeon is 7.128 GPixel/s.

Texture rate: Quadro is 94.72 GTexel/s, Radeon is 17.82 GTexel/s.

FP32: Quadro is 3.031 TFLOPS, Radeon is 570.2 GFLOPS.

FP16: Quadro is 47.36 GFLOPS (1:64), Radeon is 570.2 GFLOPS (1:1). This is the only compute metric where the Radeon is not vastly behind.

TDP: Quadro is 75 W, Radeon has no recorded TDP.

Slot width: Quadro is single-slot, Radeon is IGP.

Power connectors: Quadro has none, Radeon has none recorded.

Suggested PSU: Quadro is 250 W, Radeon has none recorded.

Bus interface: Quadro is PCIe 3.0 x16, Radeon is PCIe 3.0 x8.

Display outputs: Quadro has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, Radeon is portable device dependent.

DirectX: Quadro supports 12 (12_1), Radeon supports 12 (12_0).

OpenGL: Both support 4.6.

Vulkan: Quadro supports 1.4, Radeon supports 1.2.170.

Dimensions: Quadro is 196 mm (7.7 inches) long and 111 mm (4.4 inches) high. Radeon has no dimensions recorded.

Release date: Quadro was released in February 2017, Radeon in May 2016.

Production status: Both are end-of-life.