NVS 810 vs HD Graphics P630

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics P630 with NVS 810, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics P630
2016
1740 MB DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4, 15 Watt
2.68
+0.8%

HD Graphics P630 outperforms NVS 810 by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking775781
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.183.10
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameKaby Lake GT2GM107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date5 August 2016 (8 years ago)4 November 2015 (9 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 cores192512 ×2
Core clock speed350 MHz902 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz1033 MHz
Number of transistors189 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm++28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt68 Watt
Texture fill rate26.4033.06 ×2
Floating-point processing power0.4224 TFLOPS1.058 TFLOPS ×2
ROPs316 ×2
TMUs2432 ×2

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x1PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data198 mm
WidthIGP1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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/DDR4DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1740 MB2 GB ×2
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit ×2
Memory clock speedSystem Shared900 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data14.4 GB/s ×2
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 ConnectorsNo outputs8x 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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.11.2
Vulkan1.1.1031.1.126
CUDA-5.0

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.

HD Graphics P630 2.68
+0.8%
NVS 810 2.66

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 P630 1198
+0.7%
NVS 810 1190

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 Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Battlefield 5 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Fortnite 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Valorant 45−50
+2.2%
45−50
−2.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Battlefield 5 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 55−60
+10%
50−55
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Dota 2 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Fortnite 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Valorant 45−50
+2.2%
45−50
−2.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Dota 2 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Valorant 45−50
+2.2%
45−50
−2.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Valorant 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Valorant 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.68 2.66
Recency 5 August 2016 4 November 2015
Maximum RAM amount 1740 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 68 Watt

HD Graphics P630 has a 0.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 353.3% lower power consumption.

NVS 810, on the other hand, has a 17.7% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between HD Graphics P630 and NVS 810.

Be aware that HD Graphics P630 is a desktop card while NVS 810 is a workstation one.

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 P630
HD Graphics P630
NVIDIA NVS 810
NVS 810

Other comparisons

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.


2.9 19 votes

Rate HD Graphics P630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 8 votes

Rate NVS 810 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about HD Graphics P630 or NVS 810, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.