GeForce GTX 1630 vs Radeon Pro W6800X
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro W6800X with GeForce GTX 1630, including specs and performance data.
Pro W6800X outperforms GTX 1630 by a whopping 234% 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 | 123 | 459 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 6.76 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 15.44 | 12.33 |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) | Turing (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | Navi 21 | TU117 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 3 August 2021 (5 years ago) | 28 June 2022 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,799 | no data |
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 | 3840 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1740 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2087 MHz | 1785 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 26,800 million | 4,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 200 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 500.9 | 57.12 |
| Floating-point processing power | 16.03 TFLOPS | 1.828 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 96 | 16 |
| TMUs | 240 | 32 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 60 | no data |
| L0 Cache | 960 KB | no data |
| L1 Cache | 768 KB | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 1024 KB |
| L3 Cache | 128 MB | no data |
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 | Apple MPX | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 145 mm |
| Width | Quad-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | Apple MPX | 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 | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 96 GB/s |
| Resizable BAR | + | - |
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 | 1x HDMI 2.1, 4x Thunderbolt | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | + | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| CUDA | - | 7.5 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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 | 39.89 | 11.95 |
| Recency | 3 August 2021 | 28 June 2022 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 200 Watt | 75 Watt |
Pro W6800X has a 234% higher aggregate performance score, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71% more advanced lithography process.
GTX 1630, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 10 months, and 167% lower power consumption.
The Radeon Pro W6800X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1630 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Pro W6800X is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 1630 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.
