Quadro T1000 Max-Q vs UHD Graphics P630

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
UHD Graphics P630 UHD Graphics P630 Mobile UHD Graphics P750
VS
Quadro T400 Mobile Quadro T500 Mobile Quadro T600 Mobile Quadro T1000 Mobile Quadro T1000 Max-Q Quadro T1200 Max-Q Quadro T1200 Mobile Quadro T2000 Mobile Quadro T2000 Max-Q T500 Max-Q T550 Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics P630 with Quadro T1000 Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics P630
2020
15 Watt
6.39

T1000 Max-Q outperforms UHD Graphics P630 by a whopping 171% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

UHD Graphics P630 UHD Graphics P630
T1000 Max-Q T1000 Max-Q

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking569311
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency29.5024.02
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameComet Lake GT2TU117
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date13 May 2020 (4 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 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 cores192896
Core clock speed350 MHz765 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistorsno data4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+++12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate28.8075.60
Floating-point processing power0.4608 TFLOPS2.419 TFLOPS
ROPs332
TMUs2456

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 x16
WidthIGPno data
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data80 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 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.11.2
CUDA-7.5

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 P630 6.39
T1000 Max-Q 17.34
+171%

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 P630 2465
T1000 Max-Q 6691
+171%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1250%
27−30
+1250%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1200%
35−40
+1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1250%
27−30
+1250%
Hitman 3 4−5
−725%
30−35
+725%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−975%
85−90
+975%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−1325%
55−60
+1325%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−204%
85−90
+204%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1200%
35−40
+1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1250%
27−30
+1250%
Hitman 3 4−5
−725%
30−35
+725%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−975%
85−90
+975%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−1325%
55−60
+1325%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−204%
85−90
+204%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1200%
35−40
+1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1250%
27−30
+1250%
Hitman 3 4−5
−725%
30−35
+725%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−975%
85−90
+975%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−1325%
55−60
+1325%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−204%
85−90
+204%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 10−11
Hitman 3 6−7
−250%
21−24
+250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1350%
27−30
+1350%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 9−10

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−650%
14−16
+650%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

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

  • in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the T1000 Max-Q is 1650% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • T1000 Max-Q is ahead in 29 tests (41%)
  • there's a draw in 41 test (59%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 6.39 17.34
Recency 13 May 2020 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 50 Watt

UHD Graphics P630 has an age advantage of 11 months, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

T1000 Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 171.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro T1000 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics P630 in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics P630 is a desktop card while Quadro T1000 Max-Q is a mobile workstation 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 P630
UHD Graphics P630
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 Max-Q
Quadro T1000 Max-Q
Like
Like

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

UHD Graphics P630 UHD Graphics P630
vs
GT 1030 GeForce GT 1030
T1000 Max-Q Quadro T1000 Max-Q
vs
RTX A500 Mobile RTX A500 Mobile
UHD Graphics P630 UHD Graphics P630
vs
GTX 650 Ti GeForce GTX 650 Ti
UHD Graphics P630 UHD Graphics P630
vs
RX Vega XT Radeon RX Vega XT
UHD Graphics P630 UHD Graphics P630
vs
HD Graphics 4200 HD Graphics 4200
RTX 2070 Super GeForce RTX 2070 Super
vs
TITAN Ada TITAN Ada
Iris Plus Graphics 930 Iris Plus Graphics 930
vs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary
vs
Jetson Orin NX 8 GB Jetson Orin NX 8 GB
UHD Graphics P630 UHD Graphics P630
vs
RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile
GT 1030 GK107 GeForce GT 1030 GK107
vs
Jetson AGX Orin 64 GB Jetson AGX Orin 64 GB
Pro WX 7130 Mobile Radeon Pro WX 7130 Mobile
vs
Radeon 620 Radeon 620
Radeon 625 Radeon 625
vs
RX 5900 XT Radeon RX 5900 XT
Radeon 620 Radeon 620
vs
RX 7900 XT Radeon RX 7900 XT

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

2.8 50 votes

Rate UHD Graphics P630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 17 votes

Rate Quadro T1000 Max-Q 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.