GeForce GT 630M vs Radeon RX 470 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
Radeon RX 470 Mobile outperforms GeForce GT 630M by a whopping 1259% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 277 | 959 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 40.82 | 0.02 |
| Architecture | Polaris (2016−2019) | Fermi (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 10 Pro | N13P-GL/GL2 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 4 August 2016 (7 years ago) | 6 December 2011 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $549.99 | no data |
| Current price | $148 (0.3x MSRP) | $1121 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
RX 470 Mobile has 204000% better value for money than GT 630M.
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 | 2048 | 96 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 96 |
| Core clock speed | 926 MHz | Up to 800 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1206 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 5,700 million | 585 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 33 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 137.5 | Up to 12.8 billion/sec |
| Floating-point performance | 4,399 gflops | 253.4 gflops |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Radeon RX 470 Mobile and GeForce GT 630M 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 | large | medium sized |
| Bus support | no data | PCI Express 2.0 |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | MXM-A (3.0) |
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 | GDDR5 | DDR3\GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | Up to 128bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7000 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | Up 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| HDCP | no data | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | Up to 2048x1536 |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | no data |
| 3D Blu-Ray | no data | + |
| Optimus | no data | + |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| DirectX 11.2 | no data | 12 API |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | no data | + |
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.
Radeon RX 470 Mobile outperforms GeForce GT 630M by 1259% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
Radeon RX 470 Mobile outperforms GeForce GT 630M by 1390% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.
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:
| 900p | 250−260
+1216%
| 19
−1216%
|
| Full HD | 210−220
+1213%
| 16
−1213%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−33
+650%
|
4−5
−650%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 35−40 | 0−1 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 30−35
+1500%
|
2−3
−1500%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+1450%
|
4−5
−1450%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+1267%
|
3−4
−1267%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−33
+650%
|
4−5
−650%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+600%
|
7−8
−600%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 50−55 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 60−65
+933%
|
6−7
−933%
|
| Hitman 3 | 45−50
+1025%
|
4−5
−1025%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 60−65
+377%
|
12−14
−377%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
+1325%
|
4−5
−1325%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 50−55
+2500%
|
2−3
−2500%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 50−55
+440%
|
10−11
−440%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
+1650%
|
2−3
−1650%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 35−40 | 0−1 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 30−35
+1500%
|
2−3
−1500%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+1450%
|
4−5
−1450%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+1267%
|
3−4
−1267%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−33
+650%
|
4−5
−650%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+600%
|
7−8
−600%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 50−55 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 60−65
+933%
|
6−7
−933%
|
| Hitman 3 | 45−50
+1025%
|
4−5
−1025%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 60−65
+377%
|
12−14
−377%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
+1325%
|
4−5
−1325%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 50−55
+2500%
|
2−3
−2500%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 50−55
+440%
|
10−11
−440%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
+925%
|
4−5
−925%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
+1650%
|
2−3
−1650%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 35−40 | 0−1 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 30−35
+1500%
|
2−3
−1500%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+1267%
|
3−4
−1267%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−33
+650%
|
4−5
−650%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+600%
|
7−8
−600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 60−65
+933%
|
6−7
−933%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 60−65
+377%
|
12−14
−377%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
+1325%
|
4−5
−1325%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
+925%
|
4−5
−925%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
+1650%
|
2−3
−1650%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 50−55
+2500%
|
2−3
−2500%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+1700%
|
2−3
−1700%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 35−40
+3600%
|
1−2
−3600%
|
| Hitman 3 | 27−30
+2600%
|
1−2
−2600%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 16−18
+1600%
|
1−2
−1600%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 24−27
+500%
|
4−5
−500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+1450%
|
2−3
−1450%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+3600%
|
1−2
−3600%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 35−40
+660%
|
5−6
−660%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+1650%
|
2−3
−1650%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 35−40
+1800%
|
2−3
−1800%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+2000%
|
1−2
−2000%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 12−14 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+533%
|
6−7
−533%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| Hitman 3 | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
+2000%
|
1−2
−2000%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18−20
+1800%
|
1−2
−1800%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+2000%
|
1−2
−2000%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+2500%
|
1−2
−2500%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
+2000%
|
1−2
−2000%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+350%
|
4−5
−350%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 8−9 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16−18
+467%
|
3−4
−467%
|
This is how RX 470 Mobile and GT 630M compete in popular games:
- RX 470 Mobile is 1216% faster in 900p
- RX 470 Mobile is 1213% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 470 Mobile is 3600% faster than the GT 630M.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RX 470 Mobile surpassed GT 630M in all 38 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 18.89 | 1.39 |
| Recency | 4 August 2016 | 6 December 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 1 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 33 Watt |
The Radeon RX 470 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 630M 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.
