GeForce GT 440 vs Radeon R9 270X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 270X and GeForce GT 440, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 270X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 180 Watt
12.62
+531%

R9 270X outperforms GT 440 by a whopping 531% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking393889
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.640.08
Power efficiency4.852.13
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameCuracaoGF108
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)1 February 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $79

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 270X has 6950% better value for money than GT 440.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores128096
Core clock speedno data810 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,800 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt65 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data98 °C
Texture fill rate84.0012.96
Floating-point processing power2.688 TFLOPS0.311 TFLOPS
ROPs324
TMUs8016

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 supportPCIe 3.0PCI-E 2.0 x 16
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2 x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB GDDR5 or 1 GB
Standard memory config per GPUno data1 GB GDDR5 or 2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1600 MHz (GDDR5) or 900 MHz (DDR3)
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s28.8 (DDR3) – 51.2 (GDDR5)
Shared memory-no data

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
DisplayPort support+-
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.2
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark 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.

R9 270X 12.62
+531%
GT 440 2.00

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

R9 270X 4869
+532%
GT 440 771

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R9 270X 6560
+672%
GT 440 850

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+625%
4−5
−625%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+567%
6−7
−567%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+733%
3−4
−733%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+625%
4−5
−625%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+592%
12−14
−592%
Hitman 3 24−27
+700%
3−4
−700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+560%
10−11
−560%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+600%
6−7
−600%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+583%
6−7
−583%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+610%
10−11
−610%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+625%
4−5
−625%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+567%
6−7
−567%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+733%
3−4
−733%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+625%
4−5
−625%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+592%
12−14
−592%
Hitman 3 24−27
+700%
3−4
−700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+560%
10−11
−560%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+600%
6−7
−600%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+583%
6−7
−583%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+675%
4−5
−675%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+610%
10−11
−610%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+625%
4−5
−625%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+733%
3−4
−733%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+625%
4−5
−625%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+592%
12−14
−592%
Hitman 3 24−27
+700%
3−4
−700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+560%
10−11
−560%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+583%
6−7
−583%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+675%
4−5
−675%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+610%
10−11
−610%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+733%
3−4
−733%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Far Cry 5 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+589%
9−10
−589%
Hitman 3 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+550%
4−5
−550%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+558%
12−14
−558%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Hitman 3 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+567%
9−10
−567%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.62 2.00
Recency 8 October 2013 1 February 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB GDDR5 or 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 65 Watt

R9 270X has a 531% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 440, on the other hand, has a 12700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 176.9% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 270X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 440 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R9 270X
Radeon R9 270X
NVIDIA GeForce GT 440
GeForce GT 440

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4 741 vote

Rate Radeon R9 270X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1955 votes

Rate GeForce GT 440 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.