GeForce GT 630 vs Radeon E8950
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon E8950 with GeForce GT 630, including specs and performance data.
E8950 outperforms GT 630 by a whopping 700% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 431 | 1005 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.08 |
| Power efficiency | 10.68 | 1.95 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) | Fermi (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Amethyst | GF108 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 29 September 2015 (10 years ago) | 15 May 2012 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $99.99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 2048 | 96 |
| Core clock speed | 735 MHz | 810 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 5,000 million | 585 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 128.0 | 12.96 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.096 TFLOPS | 0.311 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 4 |
| TMUs | 128 | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 256 KB |
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).
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 145 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
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 type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 28.8 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | - | 2.1 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 13.12 | 1.64 |
| Recency | 29 September 2015 | 15 May 2012 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 65 Watt |
Radeon E8950 has a 700% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 43% more advanced lithography process.
GT 630, on the other hand, has 46% lower power consumption.
The Radeon E8950 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 630 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon E8950 is a notebook graphics card while GeForce GT 630 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
