Radeon 630 vs HD 7610M
Aggregate performance score
630 outperforms HD 7610M by a whopping 101% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 907 | 705 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.09 | 0.50 |
| Architecture | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | Thames-LE | Lexa |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 7 January 2012 (12 years ago) | 12 August 2019 (4 years ago) |
| Current price | $338 | $65 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Radeon 630 has 456% better value for money than HD 7610M.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 400 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 450 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1219 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 716 million | 2,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 9.000 | 38.98 |
| Floating-point performance | 360.0 gflops | no data |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Radeon HD 7610M and Radeon 630 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| 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 | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | 6000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 112.0 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | no data | + |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | N/A | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
630 outperforms HD 7610M by 101% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
630 outperforms HD 7610M by 101% in Passmark.
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 HD | 16
−87.5%
| 30−35
+87.5%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
−600%
|
7−8
+600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−100%
|
12−14
+100%
|
| Hitman 3 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 12−14
−30.8%
|
16−18
+30.8%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−167%
|
8−9
+167%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 10−11
−30%
|
12−14
+30%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
−600%
|
7−8
+600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−100%
|
12−14
+100%
|
| Hitman 3 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 12−14
−30.8%
|
16−18
+30.8%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−167%
|
8−9
+167%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 10−11
−30%
|
12−14
+30%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−100%
|
12−14
+100%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 12−14
−30.8%
|
16−18
+30.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−167%
|
8−9
+167%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 2−3 |
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
4K
High Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
This is how HD 7610M and Radeon 630 compete in popular games:
- Radeon 630 is 88% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 630 is 600% faster than the HD 7610M.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, Radeon 630 surpassed HD 7610M in all 43 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.63 | 3.28 |
| Recency | 7 January 2012 | 12 August 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 50 Watt |
The Radeon 630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7610M in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
