Arc A730M vs Radeon 630

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 630 and Arc A730M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Radeon 630
2019
2 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
3.38

Arc A730M outperforms 630 by a whopping 594% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking712214
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.3423.17
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code namePolaris 23DG2-512
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date13 May 2019 (5 years ago)2022 (3 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 cores5123072
Core clock speed1082 MHz1100 MHz
Boost clock speed1218 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors2,200 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate38.98393.6
Floating-point processing power1.247 TFLOPS12.6 TFLOPS
ROPs1696
TMUs32192
Tensor Coresno data384
Ray Tracing Coresno data24

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB12 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth112.0 GB/s336.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
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.

Radeon 630 3.38
Arc A730M 23.47
+594%

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.

Radeon 630 1512
Arc A730M 10487
+594%

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 HD10−12
−640%
74
+640%
1440p6−7
−650%
45
+650%
4K3−4
−633%
22
+633%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10
−667%
69
+667%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−1200%
169
+1200%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−788%
71
+788%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10
−478%
52
+478%
Battlefield 5 14−16
−607%
95−100
+607%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−1092%
155
+1092%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−700%
64
+700%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−933%
93
+933%
Fortnite 21−24
−490%
120−130
+490%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−494%
100−110
+494%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
−975%
86
+975%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
Valorant 50−55
−229%
170−180
+229%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10
−344%
40
+344%
Battlefield 5 14−16
−607%
95−100
+607%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−654%
98
+654%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
−297%
260−270
+297%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−575%
54
+575%
Dota 2 30−35
−165%
90
+165%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−856%
86
+856%
Fortnite 21−24
−490%
120−130
+490%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−494%
100−110
+494%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
−900%
80
+900%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−12
−555%
72
+555%
Metro Exodus 7−8
−514%
43
+514%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−900%
110
+900%
Valorant 50−55
−229%
170−180
+229%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−607%
95−100
+607%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−550%
52
+550%
Dota 2 30−35
−135%
80
+135%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−800%
81
+800%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−494%
100−110
+494%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−309%
45
+309%
Valorant 50−55
−96.2%
102
+96.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
−490%
120−130
+490%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
−960%
53
+960%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
−539%
170−180
+539%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
−1467%
45−50
+1467%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−503%
170−180
+503%
Valorant 35−40
−455%
210−220
+455%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−933%
31
+933%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−883%
55−60
+883%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−644%
65−70
+644%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−780%
40−45
+780%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
−786%
60−65
+786%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
−567%
20−22
+567%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−113%
34
+113%
Valorant 18−20
−733%
150−160
+733%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%
Dota 2 12−14
−583%
80−85
+583%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−775%
35
+775%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−1025%
45−50
+1025%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−600%
27−30
+600%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
−600%
27−30
+600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7
+0%
7
+0%
Metro Exodus 21
+0%
21
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how Radeon 630 and Arc A730M compete in popular games:

  • Arc A730M is 640% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A730M is 650% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A730M is 633% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A730M is 1650% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A730M is ahead in 57 tests (90%)
  • there's a draw in 6 tests (10%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.38 23.47
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 80 Watt

Radeon 630 has 60% lower power consumption.

Arc A730M, on the other hand, has a 594.4% higher aggregate performance score, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A730M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 630 in performance tests.

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.


AMD Radeon 630
Radeon 630
Intel Arc A730M
Arc A730M

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.


3.5 33 votes

Rate Radeon 630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 111 votes

Rate Arc A730M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon 630 or Arc A730M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.