Radeon 630 vs GeForce GTX 285M SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 285M SLI and Radeon 630, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GTX 285M SLI outperforms 630 by a minimal 3% 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 | 736 | 745 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.93 | 5.61 |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | N10E-GTX | Polaris 23 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 2 March 2009 (16 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 | 256 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 576 MHz | 1082 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1218 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 2,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 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 |
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 | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1020 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 compatibility
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 |
| CUDA | + | - |
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 HD | 60
+9.1%
| 55−60
−9.1%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| God of War | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| God of War | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+1.9%
|
50−55
−1.9%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 65−70
+3%
|
65−70
−3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+2.9%
|
30−35
−2.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| God of War | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+9.1%
|
10−12
−9.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+9.1%
|
10−12
−9.1%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+1.9%
|
50−55
−1.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+2.9%
|
30−35
−2.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| God of War | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+9.1%
|
10−12
−9.1%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+1.9%
|
50−55
−1.9%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30
+3.6%
|
27−30
−3.6%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
+5.3%
|
35−40
−5.3%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| God of War | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Valorant | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| God of War | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
This is how GTX 285M SLI and Radeon 630 compete in popular games:
- GTX 285M SLI is 9% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 285M SLI is 50% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- GTX 285M SLI performs better in 31 tests (53%)
- there's a draw in 27 tests (47%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.80 | 3.68 |
| Recency | 2 March 2009 | 13 May 2019 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 50 Watt |
GTX 285M SLI has a 3.3% higher aggregate performance score.
Radeon 630, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 10 years, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 285M SLI and Radeon 630.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
