GT 630M vs GTX 980 Ti

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

GTX 980 Ti
35.66
+2447%

GTX 980 Ti outperforms GT 630M by 2447% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking129955
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money4.140.02
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGM200N13P-GL/GL2
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date2 June 2015 (8 years old)6 December 2011 (12 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 no data
Current price$1195 (1.8x MSRP)$1121
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 980 Ti has 20600% better value for money than GT 630M.

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores281696
CUDA cores281696
Core clock speed1000 MHzUp to 800 MHz
Boost clock speed1075 MHzno data
Number of transistors8,000 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt33 Watt
Texture fill rate176 billion/secUp to 12.8 billion/sec
Floating-point performance6,060 gflops253.4 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 980 Ti and GeForce GT 630M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0PCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length10.5" (26.7 cm)no data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Recommended system power (PSU)600 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors6-pin + 8-pinno data
SLI options+no data

Memory

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 typeGDDR5DDR3\GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount6 GB1 GB
Memory bus width384 BitUp to 128bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth336.5 GB/sUp to 32.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2No outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI++
HDCP++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536Up to 2048x1536
G-SYNC support+no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Technologies

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

3D Blu-Rayno data+
GameStream+no data
GeForce ShadowPlay+no data
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+no data
Optimusno data+

API support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
DirectX 11.2no data12 API
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 980 Ti 35.66
+2447%
GT 630M 1.40

GTX 980 Ti outperforms GT 630M by 2447% in our combined benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 980 Ti 13822
+2455%
GT 630M 541

GTX 980 Ti outperforms GT 630M by 2455% in Passmark.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 980 Ti 48631
+899%
GT 630M 4869

GTX 980 Ti outperforms GT 630M by 899% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 980 Ti 23057
+2128%
GT 630M 1035

GTX 980 Ti outperforms GT 630M by 2128% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 980 Ti 16961
+2259%
GT 630M 719

GTX 980 Ti outperforms GT 630M by 2259% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 980 Ti 98958
+1674%
GT 630M 5577

GTX 980 Ti outperforms GT 630M by 1674% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GTX 980 Ti 37300
+1497%
GT 630M 2336

GTX 980 Ti outperforms GT 630M by 1497% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

GTX 980 Ti 443119
+653%
GT 630M 58812

GTX 980 Ti outperforms GT 630M by 653% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 980 Ti 126
+1700%
GT 630M 7

GTX 980 Ti outperforms GT 630M by 1700% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

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:

900p450−500
+2268%
19
−2268%
Full HD101
+531%
16
−531%
1440p49
+4800%
1−2
−4800%
4K50
+4900%
1−2
−4900%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+1450%
4−5
−1450%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+3000%
2−3
−3000%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+2550%
4−5
−2550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 95−100
+870%
10−11
−870%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+1450%
4−5
−1450%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+2933%
3−4
−2933%
Far Cry New Dawn 85−90
+2833%
3−4
−2833%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+11000%
1−2
−11000%
Hitman 3 110−120
+5550%
2−3
−5550%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+7600%
1−2
−7600%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+1325%
4−5
−1325%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
+1114%
7−8
−1114%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+3250%
2−3
−3250%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+3000%
2−3
−3000%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+2550%
4−5
−2550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 38
+280%
10−11
−280%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+1450%
4−5
−1450%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+2933%
3−4
−2933%
Far Cry New Dawn 85−90
+2833%
3−4
−2833%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+11000%
1−2
−11000%
Hitman 3 110−120
+5550%
2−3
−5550%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+7600%
1−2
−7600%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+3050%
2−3
−3050%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+1325%
4−5
−1325%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 33
+371%
7−8
−371%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85−90
+2100%
4−5
−2100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+3250%
2−3
−3250%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 46 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+3000%
2−3
−3000%
Battlefield 5 94
+3033%
3−4
−3033%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+1450%
4−5
−1450%
Far Cry 5 77
+2467%
3−4
−2467%
Far Cry New Dawn 85−90
+2833%
3−4
−2833%
Forza Horizon 4 72
+7100%
1−2
−7100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 59
+1375%
4−5
−1375%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+3250%
2−3
−3250%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 54
+1700%
3−4
−1700%
Hitman 3 65−70
+1525%
4−5
−1525%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+444%
9−10
−444%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+940%
5−6
−940%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+3700%
2−3
−3700%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+3150%
2−3
−3150%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+3300%
2−3
−3300%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+3650%
2−3
−3650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+2350%
2−3
−2350%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+3000%
1−2
−3000%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 32
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Hitman 3 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+225%
8−9
−225%
Metro Exodus 24−27 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 23 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 44
+4300%
1−2
−4300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24 0−1
Battlefield 5 40
+3900%
1−2
−3900%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12 0−1
Far Cry 5 30
+900%
3−4
−900%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+640%
5−6
−640%
Forza Horizon 4 42
+4100%
1−2
−4100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20 0−1

This is how GTX 980 Ti and GT 630M compete in popular games:

900p resolution:

  • GTX 980 Ti is 2268% faster than GT 630M

1080p resolution:

  • GTX 980 Ti is 531% faster than GT 630M

1440p resolution:

  • GTX 980 Ti is 4800% faster than GT 630M

4K resolution:

  • GTX 980 Ti is 4900% faster than GT 630M

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 980 Ti is 11000% faster than the GT 630M.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 980 Ti surpassed GT 630M in all 32 of our tests.

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 35.66 1.40
Recency 2 June 2015 6 December 2011
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 1 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 33 Watt

The GeForce GTX 980 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 630M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980 Ti is a desktop card while GeForce GT 630M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
GeForce GTX 980 Ti
NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M
GeForce GT 630M

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.3 1342 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 750 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.