Quadro FX 350 vs HD Graphics P630
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics P630 with Quadro FX 350, including specs and performance data.
HD Graphics P630 outperforms FX 350 by a whopping 1330% 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 | 828 | 1450 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 14.68 | 0.73 |
| Architecture | Generation 9.5 (2016−2020) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | Kaby Lake GT2 | G72 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 5 August 2016 (9 years ago) | 20 April 2006 (19 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 | 192 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | 550 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 189 million | 112 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm++ | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 21 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 26.40 | 2.200 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.4224 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 3 | 2 |
| TMUs | 24 | 4 |
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 | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 168 mm |
| Width | IGP | 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/DDR4 | DDR2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1740 MB | 128 MB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 405 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 6.48 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | no data |
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 outputs | 1x DVI, 1x VGA |
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 support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | N/A |
| Vulkan | 1.1.103 | N/A |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 3−4 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 14−16
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 45−50
+1433%
|
3−4
−1433%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 55−60
+1733%
|
3−4
−1733%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 27−30
+2700%
|
1−2
−2700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 14−16
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 45−50
+1433%
|
3−4
−1433%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 27−30
+2700%
|
1−2
−2700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 45−50
+1433%
|
3−4
−1433%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 14−16
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
+2000%
|
1−2
−2000%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
+2500%
|
1−2
−2500%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+2600%
|
1−2
−2600%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Valorant | 14−16 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4 | 0−1 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.86 | 0.20 |
| Recency | 5 August 2016 | 20 April 2006 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1740 MB | 128 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 21 Watt |
HD Graphics P630 has a 1330% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 1259% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 543% more advanced lithography process, and 40% lower power consumption.
The HD Graphics P630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 350 in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics P630 is a desktop graphics card while Quadro FX 350 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
