GMA 3000 vs GeForce GT 630

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking924not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.08no data
Power efficiency1.89no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Generation 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code nameGF108Broadwater
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date15 May 2012 (12 years ago)1 June 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores96no data
Core clock speed810 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors585 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate12.961.600
Floating-point processing power0.311 TFLOPSno data
ROPs44
TMUs164

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 2.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data+

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGANo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)9.0c
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 May 2012 1 June 2006
Chip lithography 40 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 13 Watt

GT 630 has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 125% more advanced lithography process.

GMA 3000, on the other hand, has 400% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 630 and GMA 3000. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GT 630 is a desktop card while GMA 3000 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 630
GeForce GT 630
Intel GMA 3000
GMA 3000

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.


3.1 2713 votes

Rate GeForce GT 630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 45 votes

Rate GMA 3000 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.