Radeon 820M vs UHD Graphics 630
Aggregate performance score
We've compared UHD Graphics 630 with Radeon 820M, including specs and performance data.
UHD Graphics 630 outperforms 820M by a whopping 120% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 810 | 1053 |
| Place by popularity | 52 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 14.42 | no data |
| Architecture | Generation 9.5 (2016−2020) | RDNA 3+ (2024) |
| GPU code name | Comet Lake GT2 | Krackan Point |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 October 2017 (7 years ago) | 2 June 2024 (1 year 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 cores | 184 | 128 |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1150 MHz | 2900 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 189 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm+++ | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 26.45 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.4232 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 3 | no data |
| TMUs | 23 | no 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).
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | no data |
| Width | IGP | no 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 type | System Shared | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | no data |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | no data |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 7500 MHz |
| Shared memory | + | + |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | no 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 and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | no data |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.1.103 | - |
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 | 17
+143%
| 7−8
−143%
|
| 1440p | 10
+150%
| 4−5
−150%
|
| 4K | 7
+133%
| 3−4
−133%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27
+125%
|
12−14
−125%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 19
+138%
|
8−9
−138%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Fortnite | 14−16
+275%
|
4−5
−275%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+44.4%
|
9−10
−44.4%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+35.3%
|
30−35
−35.3%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 29
−3.4%
|
30−33
+3.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 21
+133%
|
9−10
−133%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
| Fortnite | 14−16
+275%
|
4−5
−275%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 7
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+44.4%
|
9−10
−44.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+35.3%
|
30−35
−35.3%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 19
+138%
|
8−9
−138%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+44.4%
|
9−10
−44.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+156%
|
18−20
−156%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 14−16
+275%
|
4−5
−275%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
+163%
|
8−9
−163%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
+160%
|
10−11
−160%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+440%
|
5−6
−440%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+100%
|
7−8
−100%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 7
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
This is how UHD Graphics 630 and Radeon 820M compete in popular games:
- UHD Graphics 630 is 143% faster in 1080p
- UHD Graphics 630 is 150% faster in 1440p
- UHD Graphics 630 is 133% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics 630 is 900% faster.
- in Hogwarts Legacy, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the Radeon 820M is 20% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- UHD Graphics 630 performs better in 43 tests (96%)
- Radeon 820M performs better in 2 tests (4%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.84 | 1.29 |
| Recency | 1 October 2017 | 2 June 2024 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
UHD Graphics 630 has a 120.2% higher aggregate performance score.
Radeon 820M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.
The UHD Graphics 630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 820M in performance tests.
Be aware that UHD Graphics 630 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon 820M is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
