GeForce GT 630M vs Radeon HD 7990

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 7990 with GeForce GT 630M, including specs and performance data.

HD 7990
2013
3 GB GDDR5, 375 Watt
12.45
+938%

HD 7990 outperforms GT 630M by a whopping 938% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3731019
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.31no data
Power efficiency2.622.87
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameMaltaGF108
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date24 April 2013 (11 years ago)22 March 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999 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 cores2048 ×296
Core clock speed950 MHzUp to 800 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,313 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)375 Watt33 Watt
Texture fill rate128.0 ×210.56
Floating-point processing power4.096 TFLOPS ×20.2534 TFLOPS
ROPs32 ×24
TMUs128 ×216

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
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length307 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 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 typeGDDR5DDR3\GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3 GB ×21 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit ×2Up to 128bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/s ×2Up to 32.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno dataUp to 2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray-+
Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (11_0)
DirectX 11.2no data12 API
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-+

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.

HD 7990 12.45
+938%
GT 630M 1.20

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.

HD 7990 5565
+938%
GT 630M 536

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 7990 15540
+2061%
GT 630M 719

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:

900p190−200
+900%
19
−900%
Full HD160−170
+900%
16
−900%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.24no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35
+0%
35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 23
+0%
23
+0%
Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4
+0%
4
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 22
+0%
22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how HD 7990 and GT 630M compete in popular games:

  • HD 7990 is 900% faster in 900p
  • HD 7990 is 900% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 44 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.45 1.20
Recency 24 April 2013 22 March 2012
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 375 Watt 33 Watt

HD 7990 has a 937.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 630M, on the other hand, has 1036.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 7990 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 630M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7990 is a desktop card while GeForce GT 630M 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.


AMD Radeon HD 7990
Radeon HD 7990
NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M
GeForce GT 630M

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.


4.1 58 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7990 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 935 votes

Rate GeForce GT 630M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 7990 or GeForce GT 630M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.