GMA 3150 vs HD Graphics 630

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 630 and GMA 3150, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics 630
2017
64 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4, 15 Watt
3.11
+31000%

HD Graphics 630 outperforms GMA 3150 by a whopping 31000% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7591526
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.200.05
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)Generation 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code nameKaby Lake GT2Pineview
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 January 2017 (7 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 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 cores19216
Core clock speed350 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million123 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm++45 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate24.000.8
Floating-point processing power0.384 TFLOPS0.0128 TFLOPS
ROPs31
TMUs242

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).

InterfaceRing BusPCI

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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4System Shared
Maximum RAM amount64 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0c
Shader Model6.43.0
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL3.0N/A
Vulkan+N/A

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. 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.

HD Graphics 630 3.11
+31000%
GMA 3150 0.01

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.

HD Graphics 630 1197
+59750%
GMA 3150 2

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 HD15-0−1
1440p64-0−1
4K19-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 6−7 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Far Cry 5 6 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 8 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 20 0−1
Hitman 3 8−9 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24 0−1
Metro Exodus 10 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 7 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 6−7 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 15 0−1
Hitman 3 8−9 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24 0−1
Metro Exodus 4 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 16−18 0−1
Hitman 3 8−9 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 8−9 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.11 0.01
Recency 1 January 2017 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 14 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 13 Watt

HD Graphics 630 has a 31000% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

GMA 3150, on the other hand, has 15.4% lower power consumption.

The HD Graphics 630 is our recommended choice as it beats the GMA 3150 in performance tests.


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

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.


Intel HD Graphics 630
HD Graphics 630
Intel GMA 3150
GMA 3150

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.2 1235 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 141 vote

Rate GMA 3150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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