Qualcomm Adreno 685 vs UHD Graphics 630

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics 630 with Qualcomm Adreno 685, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics 630
2017
15 Watt
3.10
+22%

UHD Graphics 630 outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 685 by a significant 22% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking764831
Place by popularity35not in top-100
Power efficiency14.2324.98
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)no data
GPU code nameComet Lake GT2no data
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 October 2017 (7 years ago)6 December 2018 (6 years ago)

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 cores184no data
Core clock speed350 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1150 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+++7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt7 Watt
Texture fill rate26.45no data
Floating-point processing power0.4232 TFLOPSno data
ROPs3no data
TMUs23no data

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x1no data
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem Sharedno data
Maximum RAM amountSystem Sharedno data
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.1no data
Vulkan1.1.103-

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. 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.

UHD Graphics 630 3.10
+22%
Qualcomm Adreno 685 2.54

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.

UHD Graphics 630 1192
+22.3%
Qualcomm Adreno 685 975

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

UHD Graphics 630 1790
Qualcomm Adreno 685 1927
+7.7%

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 HD15
+25%
12−14
−25%
1440p10
+25%
8−9
−25%
4K7
+40%
5−6
−40%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
−20%
6−7
+20%
Elden Ring 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 8
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 13
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 8
+100%
4−5
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Valorant 8
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Dota 2 11
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Elden Ring 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Far Cry 5 13
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Fortnite 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Forza Horizon 4 12
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 7
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 33
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
−100%
10−11
+100%
Valorant 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
World of Tanks 29
−62.1%
45−50
+62.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Dota 2 19
+217%
6−7
−217%
Far Cry 5 10
−50%
14−16
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 11
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Valorant 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 1−2 0−1
Elden Ring 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+22.2%
18−20
−22.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
World of Tanks 21−24
+23.5%
16−18
−23.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 7
−129%
16−18
+129%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Fortnite 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Valorant 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how UHD Graphics 630 and Qualcomm Adreno 685 compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 630 is 25% faster in 1080p
  • UHD Graphics 630 is 25% faster in 1440p
  • UHD Graphics 630 is 40% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the UHD Graphics 630 is 217% faster.
  • in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 685 is 129% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 630 is ahead in 33 tests (63%)
  • Qualcomm Adreno 685 is ahead in 9 tests (17%)
  • there's a draw in 10 tests (19%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.10 2.54
Recency 1 October 2017 6 December 2018
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 7 Watt

UHD Graphics 630 has a 22% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

Qualcomm Adreno 685, on the other hand, has a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 114.3% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 685 in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics 630 is a desktop card while Qualcomm Adreno 685 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


Intel UHD Graphics 630
UHD Graphics 630
Qualcomm Adreno 685
Adreno 685

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.


3 4019 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 15 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 685 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.