Radeon 630 vs RX 580 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 580 Mobile and Radeon 630, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RX 580 Mobile outperforms 630 by a whopping 396% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 295 | 709 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 22.82 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 13.44 | 5.42 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 20 | Polaris 23 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 18 April 2017 (7 years ago) | 13 May 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $301.69 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 cores | 2304 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1082 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1077 MHz | 1218 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,700 million | 2,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 155.1 | 38.98 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.963 TFLOPS | 1.247 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 16 |
| TMUs | 144 | 32 |
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 size | large | no data |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | 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 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 256.0 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 | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
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 | 77
+450%
| 14−16
−450%
|
| 4K | 31
+417%
| 6−7
−417%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 3.92 | no data |
| 4K | 9.73 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+162%
|
12−14
−162%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+333%
|
9−10
−333%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+464%
|
10−12
−464%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+162%
|
12−14
−162%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+333%
|
9−10
−333%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85
+382%
|
16−18
−382%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+767%
|
6−7
−767%
|
| Metro Exodus | 50−55
+489%
|
9−10
−489%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 45−50
+246%
|
12−14
−246%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
+778%
|
9−10
−778%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+464%
|
10−12
−464%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+162%
|
12−14
−162%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+333%
|
9−10
−333%
|
| Dota 2 | 66
+450%
|
12−14
−450%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65−70
+210%
|
21−24
−210%
|
| Fortnite | 68
+196%
|
21−24
−196%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85
+382%
|
16−18
−382%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+767%
|
6−7
−767%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 62
+417%
|
12−14
−417%
|
| Metro Exodus | 50−55
+489%
|
9−10
−489%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 198
+482%
|
30−35
−482%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 45−50
+246%
|
12−14
−246%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 68
+423%
|
12−14
−423%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
+778%
|
9−10
−778%
|
| World of Tanks | 220−230
+240%
|
65−70
−240%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+464%
|
10−12
−464%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+162%
|
12−14
−162%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+333%
|
9−10
−333%
|
| Dota 2 | 69
+475%
|
12−14
−475%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65−70
+210%
|
21−24
−210%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85
+382%
|
16−18
−382%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+767%
|
6−7
−767%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 58
+70.6%
|
30−35
−70.6%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
+778%
|
9−10
−778%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+933%
|
3−4
−933%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+933%
|
3−4
−933%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+533%
|
27−30
−533%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16−18
+467%
|
3−4
−467%
|
| World of Tanks | 130−140
+375%
|
27−30
−375%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+700%
|
5−6
−700%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+175%
|
8−9
−175%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+300%
|
4−5
−300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
+478%
|
9−10
−478%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+900%
|
5−6
−900%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−35
+520%
|
5−6
−520%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+286%
|
7−8
−286%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+317%
|
12−14
−317%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+106%
|
16−18
−106%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+106%
|
16−18
−106%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+400%
|
3−4
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
+427%
|
10−12
−427%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
+500%
|
2−3
−500%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35
+106%
|
16−18
−106%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+106%
|
16−18
−106%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+525%
|
4−5
−525%
|
| Fortnite | 21−24
+667%
|
3−4
−667%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+1350%
|
2−3
−1350%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 16−18
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
+475%
|
4−5
−475%
|
This is how RX 580 Mobile and Radeon 630 compete in popular games:
- RX 580 Mobile is 450% faster in 1080p
- RX 580 Mobile is 417% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 580 Mobile is 1350% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RX 580 Mobile surpassed Radeon 630 in all 60 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 19.04 | 3.84 |
| Recency | 18 April 2017 | 13 May 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 50 Watt |
RX 580 Mobile has a 395.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.
Radeon 630, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and 100% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX 580 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 630 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
