UHD Graphics P630 vs Quadro RTX 5000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 5000 with UHD Graphics P630, including specs and performance data.

RTX 5000
2018
16 GB GDDR6, 230 Watt
40.11
+541%

RTX 5000 outperforms UHD Graphics P630 by a whopping 541% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking100584
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation15.03no data
Power efficiency12.2529.31
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameTU104Coffee Lake GT2
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date13 August 2018 (6 years ago)24 May 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,299 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores3072192
Core clock speed1620 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speed1815 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)230 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate348.528.80
Floating-point processing power11.15 TFLOPS0.4608 TFLOPS
ROPs643
TMUs19224
Tensor Cores384no data
Ray Tracing Cores48no data

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 x16Ring Bus
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR6System Shared
Maximum RAM amount16 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1750 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth448.0 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 Connectors4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-CPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA7.5-
DLSS+-

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.

RTX 5000 40.11
+541%
UHD Graphics P630 6.26

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.

RTX 5000 15785
+540%
UHD Graphics P630 2465

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 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 40.11 6.26
Recency 13 August 2018 24 May 2018
Chip lithography 12 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 230 Watt 15 Watt

RTX 5000 has a 540.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 months, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

UHD Graphics P630, on the other hand, has 1433.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics P630 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 5000 is a workstation card while UHD Graphics P630 is a notebook 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 RTX 5000
Quadro RTX 5000
Intel UHD Graphics P630
UHD Graphics P630

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.


3.6 220 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 50 votes

Rate UHD 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 RTX 5000 or UHD Graphics P630, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.