NVS 510 vs HD Graphics 630

Place in the ranking	762	924
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.11
Power efficiency	14.31	3.53
Architecture	Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Kaby Lake GT2	GK107
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	1 January 2017 (8 years ago)	23 October 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$449

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	192	192
Core clock speed	350 MHz	797 MHz
Boost clock speed	1000 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	189 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm++	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	35 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.00	12.75
Floating-point processing power	0.384 TFLOPS	0.306 TFLOPS
ROPs	3	16
TMUs	24	16

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).

Interface	Ring Bus	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	160 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
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	DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	64 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	891 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	28.51 GB/s
Shared memory	+	no data

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 Connectors

Portable Device Dependent

4x mini-DisplayPort

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.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	1.2
Vulkan	+	1.1.126
CUDA	-	3.0

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
+73.7%

NVS 510 1.79

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
+73.5%

NVS 510 690

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	14 +75%	8−9 −75%
1440p	64 +82.9%	35−40 −82.9%
4K	13 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	56.13
1440p	no data	12.83
4K	no data	64.14

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Elden Ring	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	7 +75%	4−5 −75%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Metro Exodus	5 +150%	2−3 −150%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7 +75%	4−5 −75%
Valorant	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Dota 2	12 +100%	6−7 −100%
Elden Ring	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Far Cry 5	18 +80%	10−11 −80%
Fortnite	16−18 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Grand Theft Auto V	4 +100%	2−3 −100%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	28 +75%	16−18 −75%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4 +100%	2−3 −100%
Valorant	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
World of Tanks	55−60 +83.3%	30−33 −83.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Dota 2	22 +83.3%	12−14 −83.3%
Far Cry 5	10 +100%	5−6 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 +75%	16−18 −75%
Valorant	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	1−2	0−1
Elden Ring	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +83.3%	12−14 −83.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
World of Tanks	21−24 +75%	12−14 −75%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Valorant	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%
Elden Ring	1−2	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6 +100%	3−4 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Dota 2	16−18 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%
Far Cry 5	3 +200%	1−2 −200%
Fortnite	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
Valorant	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%

This is how HD Graphics 630 and NVS 510 compete in popular games:

HD Graphics 630 is 75% faster in 1080p
HD Graphics 630 is 83% faster in 1440p
HD Graphics 630 is 86% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.11	1.79
Recency	1 January 2017	23 October 2012
Maximum RAM amount	64 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	35 Watt

HD Graphics 630 has a 73.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The HD Graphics 630 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 510 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 630 is a notebook card while NVS 510 is a workstation one.

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