Radeon HD 8550M vs UHD Graphics 630

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics 630 with Radeon HD 8550M, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics 630
2017
15 Watt
3.09
+105%

UHD Graphics 630 outperforms HD 8550M by a whopping 105% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking761977
Place by popularity31not in top-100
Power efficiency14.12no data
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameComet Lake GT2Sun
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 October 2017 (7 years ago)13 July 2014 (10 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 cores184320
Core clock speed350 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speed1150 MHz850 MHz
Number of transistors189 million690 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+++28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate26.4517.00
Floating-point processing power0.4232 TFLOPS0.544 TFLOPS
ROPs38
TMUs2320

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x1PCIe 3.0 x8
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 SharedDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared900 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data14.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

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 (11_1)
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.11.2
Vulkan1.1.1031.2.131

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 3.09
+105%
HD 8550M 1.51

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
+36.9%
HD 8550M 1307

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

UHD Graphics 630 7704
+108%
HD 8550M 3705

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

UHD Graphics 630 19
+68.8%
HD 8550M 11

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 HD16
+129%
7−8
−129%
1440p10
+150%
4−5
−150%
4K7
+133%
3−4
−133%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5
+25%
4−5
−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 10
+150%
4−5
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Far Cry 5 7
+250%
2−3
−250%
Far Cry New Dawn 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+900%
3−4
−900%
Hitman 3 6
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+53.3%
14−16
−53.3%
Metro Exodus 13
+117%
6−7
−117%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9
+350%
2−3
−350%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
+100%
8−9
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30
−10%
30−35
+10%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Forza Horizon 4 27
+800%
3−4
−800%
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+53.3%
14−16
−53.3%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12
+50%
8−9
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+36.4%
10−12
−36.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 28
−17.9%
30−35
+17.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+53.3%
14−16
−53.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+18.2%
30−35
−18.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

This is how UHD Graphics 630 and HD 8550M compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 630 is 129% 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 Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics 630 is 900% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the HD 8550M is 18% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 630 is ahead in 45 tests (92%)
  • HD 8550M is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.09 1.51
Recency 1 October 2017 13 July 2014
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm

UHD Graphics 630 has a 104.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics 630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8550M in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics 630 is a desktop card while Radeon HD 8550M 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
AMD Radeon HD 8550M
Radeon HD 8550M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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 3906 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 31 vote

Rate Radeon HD 8550M 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.