GeForce GTX 1630 vs Radeon RX 5300M

Place in performance ranking	390	363
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	12.64	12.89
Architecture	Navi / RDNA (2019−2020)	Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code name	Navi 14 / E19M-E65	TU117
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	13 November 2019 (4 years ago)	28 June 2022 (2 years ago)
Current price	$525	$213

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1630 has 2% better value for money than RX 5300M.

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	1408	512
Core clock speed	1036 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1445 MHz	1785 MHz
Number of transistors	6,400 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	127.2	57.12

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon RX 5300M and GeForce GTX 1630 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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 4.0 x8	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	no data	145 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	96 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	14000 MHz	12 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	168.0 GB/s	96 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.5	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	no data	7.5

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.

RX 5300M 11.15

GTX 1630 12.92
+15.9%

GeForce GTX 1630 outperforms Radeon RX 5300M by 16% based on our aggregate 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%

RX 5300M 4307

GTX 1630 4991
+15.9%

GeForce GTX 1630 outperforms Radeon RX 5300M by 16% 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

−9.4%

70−75
+9.4%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16

−21.4%

16−18
+21.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50−55 −18%	59 +18%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Battlefield 5	30−33 −16.7%	35−40 +16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40−45 −27.5%	51 +27.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Far Cry 5	60−65 −16.7%	70 +16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 −21.5%	79 +21.5%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −20%	50−55 +20%
Hitman 3	18−20 −16.7%	21−24 +16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −31.4%	45−50 +31.4%
Metro Exodus	75−80 −16%	87 +16%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 −18.3%	71 +18.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −25.9%	30−35 +25.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −30%	35−40 +30%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35−40 −20%	42 +20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Battlefield 5	30−33 −16.7%	35−40 +16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −17.1%	41 +17.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Far Cry 5	50−55 −22%	61 +22%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 −20%	54 +20%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −20%	50−55 +20%
Hitman 3	18−20 −16.7%	21−24 +16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −31.4%	45−50 +31.4%
Metro Exodus	55−60 −20%	66 +20%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 −22%	61 +22%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −25.9%	30−35 +25.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 −20%	60 +20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −30%	35−40 +30%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −19%	25 +19%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −22.2%	22 +22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Far Cry 5	30−33 −26.7%	38 +26.7%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −20%	50−55 +20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −31.4%	45−50 +31.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −25.9%	30−35 +25.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 −26.7%	38 +26.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −30%	35−40 +30%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

45−50

−17.8%

53
+17.8%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −22.2%	21−24 +22.2%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 −18.8%	18−20 +18.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −22.2%	10−12 +22.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −30%	12−14 +30%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −28.6%	18−20 +28.6%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −16.7%	21−24 +16.7%
Hitman 3	12−14 −16.7%	14−16 +16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −27.8%	21−24 +27.8%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −22.2%	10−12 +22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

−28.6%

18−20
+28.6%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 −22.2%	10−12 +22.2%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Hitman 3	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	1−2
Far Cry 5	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −16.7%	14−16 +16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Metro Exodus	9−10 −22.2%	10−12 +22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
−25%

10−11

+25%

This is how RX 5300M and GTX 1630 compete in popular games:

GTX 1630 is 9% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	11.15	12.92
Recency	13 November 2019	28 June 2022
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	7 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	75 Watt