UHD Graphics 630 vs FirePro S7000

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro S7000 with UHD Graphics 630, including specs and performance data.

FirePro S7000
2012
4 GB GDDR5, 350 Watt
10.12
+279%

S7000 outperforms UHD Graphics 630 by a whopping 279% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking426780
Place by popularitynot in top-10041
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.70no data
Power efficiency5.3514.10
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code namePitcairnComet Lake GT2
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date27 August 2012 (12 years ago)1 October 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,249 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores1280184
Core clock speed950 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1150 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)350 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate76.0026.45
Floating-point processing power2.432 TFLOPS0.4232 TFLOPS
ROPs323
TMUs8023

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 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x1
Length292 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1200 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth153.6 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 Connectors1x DisplayPortNo outputs
DisplayPort count1no data
Dual-link DVI support+-

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.103

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.

FirePro S7000 10.12
+279%
UHD Graphics 630 2.67

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.

FirePro S7000 4523
+279%
UHD Graphics 630 1192

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD60−65
+253%
17
−253%
1440p35−40
+250%
10
−250%
4K24−27
+243%
7
−243%

Cost per frame, $

1080p20.82no data
1440p35.69no data
4K52.04no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
+0%
5
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5
+0%
5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 19
+0%
19
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6
+0%
6
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4
+0%
4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 29
+0%
29
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 21
+0%
21
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7
+0%
7
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 3
+0%
3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 19
+0%
19
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 7
+0%
7
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how FirePro S7000 and UHD Graphics 630 compete in popular games:

  • FirePro S7000 is 253% faster in 1080p
  • FirePro S7000 is 250% faster in 1440p
  • FirePro S7000 is 243% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.12 2.67
Recency 27 August 2012 1 October 2017
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 350 Watt 15 Watt

FirePro S7000 has a 279% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics 630, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 2233.3% lower power consumption.

The FirePro S7000 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 630 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro S7000 is a workstation graphics card while UHD Graphics 630 is a desktop one.

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 FirePro S7000
FirePro S7000
Intel UHD Graphics 630
UHD Graphics 630

Other comparisons

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.


4.5 15 votes

Rate FirePro S7000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 4189 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro S7000 or UHD Graphics 630, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.