Radeon 630 vs GeForce 8800M GTX SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 8800M GTX SLI and Radeon 630, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
630 outperforms 8800M SLI by an impressive 96% 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 | 932 | 747 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.11 | 5.65 |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | NB8E-GTX | Polaris 23 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 19 November 2007 (17 years ago) | 13 May 2019 (6 years ago) |
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 cores | 192 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 1082 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1218 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 2,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 38.98 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 1.247 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 16 |
| TMUs | no data | 32 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 512 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).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 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 | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 112.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 data | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2.131 |
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
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−400%
|
14−16
+400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−100%
|
8−9
+100%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−180%
|
14−16
+180%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−400%
|
14−16
+400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−100%
|
8−9
+100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−120%
|
10−12
+120%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−163%
|
21−24
+163%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−80%
|
18−20
+80%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−150%
|
10−11
+150%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−45.5%
|
16−18
+45.5%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−35.9%
|
50−55
+35.9%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−180%
|
14−16
+180%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−400%
|
14−16
+400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
−74.4%
|
65−70
+74.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−100%
|
8−9
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−61.9%
|
30−35
+61.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−120%
|
10−12
+120%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−163%
|
21−24
+163%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−80%
|
18−20
+80%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−150%
|
10−11
+150%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−45.5%
|
16−18
+45.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−35.9%
|
50−55
+35.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−180%
|
14−16
+180%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−100%
|
8−9
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−61.9%
|
30−35
+61.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−120%
|
10−12
+120%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−80%
|
18−20
+80%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−45.5%
|
16−18
+45.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−35.9%
|
50−55
+35.9%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9
−163%
|
21−24
+163%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−115%
|
27−30
+115%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−66.7%
|
30−33
+66.7%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−200%
|
35−40
+200%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−6.7%
|
16−18
+6.7%
|
| Valorant | 10−11
−90%
|
18−20
+90%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Dota 2 | 4−5
−200%
|
12−14
+200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
1440p
High
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the Radeon 630 is 400% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Radeon 630 performs better in 53 tests (98%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.79 | 3.51 |
| Recency | 19 November 2007 | 13 May 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 50 Watt |
Radeon 630 has a 96.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 160% lower power consumption.
The Radeon 630 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800M GTX SLI in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
