HD Graphics P630 vs Quadro P2000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy
Quadro P1000 Quadro P2000 Mobile Quadro P2000 Max-Q Quadro P3000 Mobile Quadro P3200 Quadro P3200 Max-Q Quadro P4000 Mobile Quadro P4200 Quadro P4200 Max-Q Quadro P5000 Mobile Quadro P5200 Quadro P5200 Max-Q
VS
#ad 
Buy
HD Graphics P530 HD Graphics P630

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P2000 Mobile with HD Graphics P630, including specs and performance data.

P2000 Mobile
2019
3.75 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
13.51
+404%

P2000 Mobile outperforms HD Graphics P630 by a whopping 404% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

P2000 Mobile Quadro P2000
HD Graphics P630 HD Graphics P630

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking355772
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.3514.23
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGP106Kaby Lake GT2
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date15 February 2019 (6 years ago)5 August 2016 (8 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 cores1152192
Core clock speed1291 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speed1291 MHz1100 MHz
Number of transistors4,400 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm14 nm++
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate92.9526.40
Floating-point processing power2.974 TFLOPS0.4224 TFLOPS
ROPs323
TMUs7224

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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x1
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeGDDR5DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount3.75 GB1740 MB
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1502 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth96.13 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.21.1.103
CUDA6.1-

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
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
High Preset

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

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 57 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 13.51 2.68
Recency 15 February 2019 5 August 2016
Maximum RAM amount 3.75 GB 1740 MB
Chip lithography 16 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 15 Watt

P2000 Mobile has a 404.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 120.7% higher maximum VRAM amount.

HD Graphics P630, on the other hand, has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics P630 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while HD Graphics P630 is a desktop 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.

NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Mobile
Quadro P2000
Intel HD Graphics P630
HD Graphics P630
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

P2000 Mobile Quadro P2000 Mobile
vs
Pro 5300M Radeon Pro 5300M
HD Graphics P630 HD Graphics P630
vs
UHD Graphics 630 UHD Graphics 630
P2000 Mobile Quadro P2000 Mobile
vs
M4000M Quadro M4000M
RX 560 XT Radeon RX 560 XT
vs
RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation
Pro 570X Radeon Pro 570X
vs
Apple M4 8-core GPU 8 core GPU
Iris Plus Graphics 950 Iris Plus Graphics 950
vs
RTX 2060 Super RTX 2060 Super
Tesla K80 Tesla K80
vs
8800M GTX GeForce 8800M GTX
Tesla K80 Tesla K80
vs
8800 GS GeForce 8800 GS
P2000 Mobile Quadro P2000 Mobile
vs
GeForce 9400 GeForce 9400
GTX 1650 Mobile GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile
vs
ATI X1650 Radeon X1650
GTX 1650 Mobile GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile
vs
GT 240 GT 240
Radeon 540 Radeon 540
vs
GTX 555 OEM GTX 555 OEM
Radeon 540 Radeon 540
vs
RTX 3060 12 GB GA104 RTX 3060 12 GB GA104

Community ratings

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

4 111 votes

Rate Quadro P2000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 19 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P2000 Mobile or HD Graphics P630, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.