(Tested) ASUS GeForce GT 440 Review

ASUS GeForce GT 440 review index

3 – ASUS GeForce GT 440 OpenGL Tests

– CPU: Core i7 960 @ 3.2GHz
– RAM: 4GB DDR3 Corsair Dominator
– Motherboard: GIGABYTE X58-A UD5
– Windows 7 64-bit
– Graphics drivers: R266.58
– PSU: Corsair AX1200

PSU: Corsair AX1200

3.1 FurMark (OpenGL 2)

FurMark 1.8.2 has been used for the test. FurMark homepage is HERE.

Settings: 1920×1080 fullscreen, no AA, no postFX, 60sec, Xtreme mode UNCHECKED.

Rule: The higher the number of points, the faster the card is.

8362 points (140 FPS) – EVGA GeForce GTX 580 SC, ***OCP disabled***, GPU core: 880MHz
8259 points (138 FPS) – ASUS ENGTX580 ***OCP disabled***, GPU Core: 871MHz, VDDC: 1.088V
7769 points (130 FPS) – EVGA GeForce GTX 580 SC, ***OCP disabled***, GPU core: 797MHz
6470 points – EVGA GeForce GTX 480
6341 points (FPS: 106) – SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 6970, GPU core: 880MHz, PowerTune: +20%
5841 points (97 FPS) – ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti DirectCU II TOP
5742 points (96 FPS) – ASUS Radeon HD 6950 DC2 (GPU @ 810MHz), PowerTune: +20%
5420 points – ATI Radeon HD 5870
5383 points – ASUS Radeon HD 6950, PowerTune: +20%
5161 points – MSI GeForce GTX 470
4641 points (FPS: 78) – SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 6870, GPU core: 1000MHz
4583 points (FPS: 76) – SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 6870, GPU core: 980MHz
4484 points (FPS: 74) – ASUS EAH6870
4310 points (FPS: 72) – SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 6870
4243 points (FPS: 71) – EVGA GeForce GTX 580 SC, OCP enabled
3912 points (FPS: 65) – SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 6970, GPU core: 880MHz, PowerTune: 0
3884 points – MSI N460GTX Cyclone 768D5 OC
3824 points (FPS: 64) – SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 6970, GPU core: 880MHz, PowerTune: -20%
2772 points – MSI R5770 Hawk
1425 points (FPS: 24) – ASUS GeForce GT 440

3.2 TessMark (OpenGL 4)

Hardware tessellation is one of the big features of Direct3D 11 and OpenGL 4 capable graphics cards. TessMark is a new benchmark focused only on the tessellation engine of DX11 class cards. It’s a pure tessellation benchmark, it does not contain complex shader or other heavy texture fetches. TessMark shows an overview of the tessellation engine raw power, that’s all. DX11 specifies that the tessellation factor can vary from 1.0 up tp 64.0. Of course, for tessellation factors like 32 or 64, most of the tessellated triangles are smaller than… a pixel. In those cases, tessellation is useless and in a real world application such as a game, high tessellation factors won’t be used. But in the case of a synthetic benchmark, it’s always instructive to see how cards can handle the whole range of tessellation level.

TessMark 0.2.2 has been used for the test.

Settings: 1920×1080 fullscreen, no AA, 60sec, map set 1.

TessMark - OpenGL 4 tessellation

Rule: The higher the number of points, the faster the card is.

Tessellation factor 8.0: moderate

53151 (888FPS) – EVGA GTX 580 SC
52188 (872FPS) – ASUS ENGTX580
48084 – EVGA GeForce GTX 480
39663 points (662 FPS) – ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti DirectCU II TOP
38191 – MSI GeForce GTX 470
30512 – MSI N460GTX Cyclone 768D5 OC
29633 points (494 FPS) – ASUS Radeon HD 6950 DC2 (GPU @ 810MHz)
27718 (462FPS) – Sapphire HD 6870, GPU core: 1000MHz
27469 (458FPS) – Sapphire HD 6970, GPU core: 880MHz
26223 – ASUS EAH6870
25480 (425FPS) – ASUS Radeon HD 6950
24161 (403FPS) – ATI Radeon HD 5870
23131 (386FPS) – Sapphire HD 6870
20745 – MSI R5770 Hawk
10148 (169 FPS) – ASUS GeForce GT 440

Tessellation factor 16.0: normal

33266 (555FPS) – EVGA GTX 580 SC
32666 (545FPS) – ASUS ENGTX580
29196 – EVGA GeForce GTX 480
23594 points (393 FPS) – ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti DirectCU II TOP
23316 – MSI GeForce GTX 470
17452 – MSI N460GTX Cyclone 768D5 OC
9255 (154FPS) – Sapphire HD 6870, GPU core: 1000MHz
8846 points (147 FPS) – ASUS Radeon HD 6950 DC2 (GPU @ 810MHz)
8555 – ASUS EAH6870
8229 (137FPS) – Sapphire HD 6970, GPU core: 880MHz
8177 (136FPS) – Sapphire HD 6870
8018 (134FPS) – ATI Radeon HD 5870
7669 – MSI R5770 Hawk
7384 (123FPS) – ASUS HD 6950
6345 (106 FPS) – ASUS GeForce GT 440

Tessellation factor 32.0: extreme

15427 (257FPS) – EVGA GTX 580 SC
15128 (252FPS) – ASUS ENGTX580
13008 – EVGA GeForce GTX 480
9997 – MSI GeForce GTX 470
9878 points (165 FPS) – ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti DirectCU II TOP
6729 – MSI N460GTX Cyclone 768D5 OC
2826 (47FPS) – ASUS GeForce GT 440
2299 – ASUS EAH6870
2246 (38FPS) – Sapphire HD 6870
2156 (36FPS) – ATI Radeon HD 5870
2122 (35FPS) – Sapphire HD 6970, GPU core: 880MHz
2159 – MSI R5770 Hawk
1988 points (33 FPS) – ASUS Radeon HD 6950 DC2 (GPU @ 810MHz)
1910 (32FPS) – ASUS HD 6950

Tessellation factor 64.0: insane

4940 (82FPS) – EVGA GTX 580 SC
4840 (81FPS) – ASUS ENGTX580
3963 – EVGA GeForce GTX 480
3169 – MSI GeForce GTX 470
2895 points (48 FPS) – ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti DirectCU II TOP
1959 – MSI N460GTX Cyclone 768D5 OC
868 (15FPS) – ASUS GeForce GT 440
585 – ASUS EAH6870
574 (10FPS) – Sapphire HD 6870
565 – MSI R5770 Hawk
550 (10FPS) – ATI Radeon HD 5870
539 (9FPS) – Sapphire HD 6970, GPU core: 880MHz
490 points (9 FPS) – ASUS Radeon HD 6950 DC2 (GPU @ 810MHz)
485 (9FPS) – ASUS HD 6950

3.3 ShaderToyMark (OpenGL 2)

ShaderToyMark 0.1.0 is an OpenGL 2 benchmark, developed with GeeXLab,
and focused on pixel shaders only. The pixel shaders are heavily based on math (few texture fetches) and then ShaderToyMark can be seen as a kind of GPU computing benchmark.

ShaderToyMark - OpenGL 2 pixel shader

Settings: 960×540 windowed, no AA, 60sec

316 points (52 FPS) – EVGA GTX 580 SC
306 points (51 FPS) – ASUS ENGTX580
263 points (43 FPS) – GeForce GTX 480
242 points (40 FPS) – ASUS Radeon HD 6950 DC2 (GPU @ 950MHz)
234 (39FPS) – Sapphire HD 6970
218 points (36 FPS) – ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti DirectCU II TOP
208 (34FPS) – ASUS HD 6950
207 points (34 FPS) – ASUS Radeon HD 6950 DC2 (GPU @ 810MHz)
189 points (31 FPS) – ATI Radeon HD 5870
184 points (30 FPS) – ASUS EAH6870
179 (29FPS) – Sapphire HD 6870
156 points (26 FPS) – MSI N460GTX Cyclone
104 points (17 FPS) – MSI R5770 Hawk
55 (9FPS) – ASUS GeForce GT 440
46 points (7 FPS) – GeForce 9800 GTX
36 points (6 FPS) – EVGA GTX 280
33 points (5 FPS) – GeForce GTX 260

3.4 OpenGL 4 Mountains demo

Mountains demo is an OpenGL 4 demo that shows hierarchical-Z map based occlusion culling in action.

OpenGL 4 Mountains demo

Settings: default window size: 1024×768, ICR enabled (Instance Cloud Reduction), Hi-Z enabled and dynamic LOD enabled.

684 FPS – EVGA GTX 580 SC
568 FPS – EVGA GTX 480
492 FPS – ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti DirectCU II TOP
390 FPS – Sapphire Radeon HD 6970
360 FPS – ASUS Radeon HD 6950 DC2 (GPU @ 810MHz)
350 FPS – MSI N460GTX Cyclone 768D5
318 FPS – ASUS Radeon HD 6950
255 FPS – ASUS EAH6870
235 FPS – Sapphire Radeon HD 6870
231 FPS – Radeon HD 5870
220 FPS – MSI R5770 Hawk
122 FPS – ASUS GeForce GT 440

3.5 GluxMark2 (OpenGL 2)

GluxMark2 is a purely syntethic OpenGL benchmark
and tries to measure performance from every point of view by using programmable graphics pipeline (vertex, geometry and fragment/pixel shaders).

OpenGL 2 - GluxMark2

Preset: high-end (1920×1080, MSAA: 8X)

11002 points (OpenCL: +4318 = 15320 points) – EVGA GTX 580 SC
9216 points (OpenCL: +2776 = 11992 points) – GeForce GTX 480
8099 points – Radeon HD 5870
8026 points (OpenCL: +654 = 8680 points) – ASUS Radeon HD 6950
8010 points (OpenCL: +709 = 8719 points) – Sapphire Radeon HD 6970
7873 points (OpenCL: +4257 = 12130 points) – ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti DirectCU II TOP
6615 points – Sapphire Radeon HD 6870
5367 points (OpenCL: +2789 = 8156 points) – MSI N460GTX Cyclone
1975 points (OpenCL: +1273 = 3248 points) – ASUS GeForce GT 440

3.6 Unigine Heaven (OpenGL 4)

For this last OpenGL test, I used Ungine Heaven 2.1, one of the standard Direct3D / OpenGL synthetic benchmark.

OpenGL 4 - Unigine Heaven 2.1

Settings: 1920×1080 fullscreen, OpenGL rendering, tessellation: normal, shaders: high, AA: 4X, 16X anisotropic filtering.

48.6 FPS, Scores: 1224 – EVGA GTX 580 SC
46.4 FPS, Scores: 1168 – ASUS ENGTX580
38.7 FPS, Scores: 974 – EVGA GeForce GTX 480
35.8 FPS, Scores: 901 – ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti DirectCU II TOP
24.7 FPS, Scores: 622 – SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 6970
24.5 FPS, Scores: 617 – MSI N460GTX Cyclone 768D5 OC
24.2 FPS, Scores: 609 – ASUS Radeon HD 6950 DC2
21.6 FPS, Scores: 544 – ASUS Radeon HD 6950
15.9 FPS, Scores: 400 – ATI Radeon HD 5870
13.6 FPS, Scores: 342 – ASUS EAH6870
13.5 FPS, Scores: 339 – SAPPHIRE HD6870
9.5 FPS, Scores: 240 – ASUS GeForce GT 440
9 FPS, Scores: 227 – MSI R5770 Hawk

ASUS GeForce GT 440 review index

28 thoughts on “(Tested) ASUS GeForce GT 440 Review”

  1. spiked_mistborn

    Nice review, thanks! It does a good job of showing how you can get much better performance by spending just a little more money. 5670 and 450 would have been good for comparison though. Also, can you please run the 5770 crossfire setup through all benchmarks in the future? I would especially like to see how it impacts tessellation. I’m considering either selling my 5770 and going to a 6870 or 560, or getting another 5770. Seems like 5770 crossfire might be a good choice. Love the site, keep up the good work.

  2. JeGX Post Author

    Thanks for your feedback.

    If I were at your place, I think I’d sell my HD5770 and I’d invest into a GTX 560 Ti. This card supports all APIs, has nice tessellation performance and is not too expensive.

    I’ll try to do this test: HD 5770 CF vs GTX 560 Ti…

  3. Ghost

    ( HAWX2 is a Direct3D 11 benchmark, promoted by NVIDIA, with tessellation )

    Is this a shame?

    AMD promoted many of the DX11 games Now, simply Stop promoting And others blame

  4. DrBalthar

    I repeat it again the GT440 is piss poor. There is no market for such a totally underperforming card since it is way too expansive compared with the competition.

  5. spiked_mistborn

    Unless the price is very low I don’t see how this 440 can compete. I did not see any listed yet, but (if you actually get the rebate) you can get a 5670 for US$60, a GTS450 for $95, and a 5770 for $110. A google conversion says 90 euros is US$ 122.

  6. Hasselhoffia

    Actually there is a market for the GT440, and that’s in the Media Center/Home Theatre PC arena where you want something capable of showing Blu-Ray HD/3D output via HDMI, not churn out masses of heat or fan-noise, fit in a low profile casing, run quite happily off a 300W PSU, and not kill your power bill. All the comparable ATI’s require a 400W PSU or better.

    But yes, for modern gaming on a full size rig environments, this card doesn’t make sense.

  7. DrBalthar


    Well that would be true:

    If a) nVidia’s picture output quality wouldn’t be shit like hell

    and b) You really would get away with a 300W PSU. Which is doubtful since AMD market equivalents use less power

  8. JohnP

    I just came across this review, and I agree with the first poster: use cards in the same price/performance range to allow users to get an idea of why they MIGHT (or might not) need this card. I was looking forward to a comparison with the ATI Radeon HD 5570/5670. I’m sure many readers are interested in cards that would allow them to play games, yet don’t require an external power connector. Many store-bought computers still come with PSUs rated at less than 450W, and have no connectors for PCI-E graphics cards.

  9. RonS

    Since you’ve come to a conclusion that it is not suitable as a primary performance GPU (but without evidence relative to the 5670). Perhaps it might be worthwhile to focus on its relative performance as a dedicated CUDA/physx card. I’d be curious how this stacks up in that regards with the other 96sp cards: 8800gs, gt240 and the 430 (plus the gt220, 9600gt and 8800gt)

  10. Jimc

    I honestly dont get what’s so piss poor about this card. Is the HD 4670 piss poor too? If so you’re probably just a rich snob. I recieved the gt 440 today, havent had the chance to try it due to work, but it’s stats seem to be significantly stronger than my 4670, in which case it will perform better. My 4670 already ran the games I play on high and ultra with 30 to 40 FPS. You cant sense any lag above 25FPS, hell, even 15 is acceptable in slower paced games. 80FPS is just ridiculous, it’s unnecessary if you’re poor. So this card, from what I can see, is not “piss poor”. It’s for gamers that can accept great and dont need OMGWTFOVERDONEPERFECT.

  11. Mic fieldjobs

    indeed.Just the fact that this is a 128 bit-bus en ddr5 make this a great entry card.
    In most cases your better of with this one,than a 256 but-bus and gddr3.
    You can also say that this card is faster dan a high end card ,from 3/4 years back.
    Any way it is a nice entry card,no doubt .

  12. farrukh

    well..in my opinion this is great card for low end computers and for performance. Not every body willing to go for high end cards (just a craze). Perfect piece for low budget upgrade.

  13. MaDnEsS

    I bought this card today. (NOT Asus, its Gainward). Price is OK 61euros,it perform well in HD gaming (Black ops,Assasin C Brotherhood…)in a mid class pc (ATH II 250, 2Gb DDR3, Hitachu 500Gb HDD,Blueberry 420W Psu) I dont no about you guys but im workin` for money, and im not stupid spend more than 50-80euros 4 graph card wich im jusing maybe 5hours/week

  14. Kossa

    Great review but can I use it with 315W power unit ? (update of my old card radeon x600)

  15. Xbobo

    This card is great.I’m going to buy it for replacement with my old x1550(Ati sucks)..I think it will work for you Kossa.And for the ones who said this card it’s not for gaming…mhm come on It Rocks! Perfect upgrade for low bugget.Buy it! 🙂

  16. outofcash

    Sigh so much talk that this card sucks. But wtf shall I do, I got and old PC with a burned up GPU and 300W. I can’t afford a better card for 150$+ which require me to also buy a new PCU for 80$ which I have no competence to install at all. WTF give me 3000$ and I would buy all your wtfpawnstuff instant!

  17. Latvietis96

    since in my country computer hardware is very expensive, I got this card for $120.
    Compared to my old Nvidia 7100GS 512mb its like 200% better, so gtfo if u bitch about this card.
    Even with my old CPU (Pentium D 3.7 ghz and yes im getting a core 2 duo soon) I run black ops maxed with 4x anti alliasting and with my max screen res- 1360×768 at 23-60 FPS. And I run FEAR 3 maxed at 25-50 FPS. And as you can see, this card isnt that crappy at all- the GTX580 ran crysis at 77fps while the GT440- 35 fps that is- the best GPU on planet is only like 55-60% better.

  18. oussama alaoui benchad

    Hey, j’ai cette carte graphique je vous conseille de l’acheté elle est pas mal et bonne pour les jeux vidéos !
    tous marche maintenant chez moi !
    Merci asus merci nvidia !

  19. wickedpsylense

    I installed a Asus GT440 brand new out of the box.
    For some reason the cd that came with the graphics card didn’t work in my cd player. I downloaded the drivers from the internet and installed them. Wow what a difference. The only problem I had was I lost my sound. No sound what so ever. I checked my drivers and they are gone and windows vista cant find my existing onboard sound hardware. My computer is a HP Pavilion a6177c TV pc. Can anyone help?? You guys sound pretty smart here

  20. Naushad

    Card is available at Very Cheaper then Mentioned hear for Price do E-Mail me. My main Problem with this Card is IT DOESN’T Supports Old games like Warcraft 3 Frozen Thrones (DotA).

    any good advice or Solution do Email me.

  21. Chuck

    I don’t agree with this review. I use this card for playing whatever game I want, RE5 runs like butter average 60fps with this card, hell I’m even playing Skyrim at high settings with this! It may not be the greatest card on the market but it does a nice job with games.

    I think you are being too harsh on your review

  22. AquaDrake

    I think playing games doesn’t rely on graphics card alone, I also use this card and performs very well, Battlefield 3, Shift 2 Unleashed,and crysis 2! Shooting games at mid settings, racing games at full! I double my fps by overclocking my Processor, I have AMD Athlon 2 x2 250, 3.0 ghz, dual core, pretty much on the entry level, i oc’ed at 3.9ghz, and ZOOM! Double FPS! All entry level hardware can still perform very well if u know what to do, some people just want to have bragging rights with their hardware, honestly, u can’t win tournaments with 100 fps… Kickass players with 30 fps will kill u in an instant!

  23. Ceejoe89

    I thought of buying a gt450 but then realised that i still need to increase my 250watts psu, so I decided to split the cash and go for a gt440 and a 450watts. I’m a great fan of nvidia cards, ‘Piss poor’, no i say.

  24. Bizzle

    Hello every one.
    I just though i would read some reviews on my card and see what other people think.
    (Piss poor) haaaa i dont think you know what you are on about, here is my system.

    Core 2 Duo E8400 3.6Ghz (Eo) steping
    Asus p5g41 main board
    4 Gb DDR3 1333 Ram
    500watt psu
    Seagate 250Gb 7200Rpm 16mb chase
    Asus GT440 DDR5 1Gb
    windows 7 32bit

    Now the people in here that are saying that this card is shit are more then likley little kids with very rich mumey and dady so they get the best witch is not needed.
    there is not oner game out at the moment that the gt440 can not run. gtx560 580 & 590 u dont need them i was gonner get one but when i saw the price i though why would i spend that much on somethink so not needed so i got this.
    and i run all and any game out at the min and will be able to for some years yet, i dont even have a wiked computer but it is godd and this is a good card a good price and there is a big market for this they have sold so many so go for it dont listen to thes little kids i play all my games on high or max out and i am never getting less the 25fps no lie so get it good card a good for gaming.
    all they are is ppl giving it a bad name to put u off well fuck them they dont know what they talking about because they dont have to work to get there things were as most normale ppl do.
    it is a good card go for it i did and i dont regret it have a look on ebay that is the best place to get it and i would say go for the asus one cos u can overclcok it and bleave me it overclocks like a beast mine at the min is at 980Mhz core clock and even stock it is so good i am just obsesed with overclocking stuff
    have fun it wont let u down

  25. vincci

    i would say that ati5670 is a bit over all faster than this 440(load and process faster). BUT!!! Pixel wise, the 440 is above it! 440 has 14256 Mpixels/sec while 5670 is only at 6200 Mpixels/sec.

  26. KD

    Dear All,
    Can I install NVIDIA GT 440 PciXpress INNO3D card HP Compaq 6200 Pro MT with 340 watts PSU.Bye

  27. Talska

    I use GT440 and play battelfield on 1280-1024 and high setting. 35-45 FPS. Not everyone want to buy a card for 300 euro, if you do that you are stupid.

    My spec,s:
    AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 B55 Processor (4 CPUs), ~3.3GHz
    8192MB RAM
    Hard Drive:
    2 TB total
    Video Card:
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 DDR3!
    Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit (6.1, Build 7601) Service Pack 1 (7601.win7sp1_gdr.111118-2330)
    MSI 760GM-P23
    Computer Case:
    HKC 4673GD
    PSU:(Adata Pro 550 watt)

  28. jerry

    I truely agree with bizzle . gt 440 is really a great video card for entry lvl of gamer , gddr 5memory type with 65power supply is unbeatable and 3200mhz memory bus , around 90 dallors, no other card can reach this . Getting around 30fps is enough and playble for latest game. It is unnecessary for getting more than 40fps or your mom and daddy are just too rich . it is really good for installing in a computer that with low psu .
    last I have been looking for this card for a long time .

Comments are closed.