Radeon RX 6500 XT vs GeForce GT 630M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 630M with Radeon RX 6500 XT, including specs and performance data.

GT 630M
2012
1 GB DDR3\GDDR5, 33 Watt
1.39

RX 6500 XT outperforms GT 630M by a whopping 1684% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking999216
Place by popularitynot in top-10082
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data58.33
Power efficiency3.0416.72
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGF108Navi 24
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date22 March 2012 (12 years ago)19 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$199

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 cores961024
Core clock speedUp to 800 MHz2610 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2815 MHz
Number of transistors585 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt107 Watt
Texture fill rate10.56180.2
Floating-point processing power0.2534 TFLOPS5.765 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs1664
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x4
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin

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 typeDDR3\GDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB8 GB
Memory bus widthUp to 128bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz2248 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 32.0 GB/s143.9 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 outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI++
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolutionUp to 2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray+-
Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
DirectX 11.212 APIno data
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.12.2
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+-

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.

GT 630M 1.39
RX 6500 XT 24.80
+1684%

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.

GT 630M 538
RX 6500 XT 9569
+1679%

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.

GT 630M 4869
RX 6500 XT 76445
+1470%

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.

GT 630M 1035
RX 6500 XT 22954
+2118%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GT 630M 719
RX 6500 XT 15712
+2085%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GT 630M 5577
RX 6500 XT 91909
+1548%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GT 630M 58812
RX 6500 XT 356129
+506%

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:

900p19
−1479%
300−350
+1479%
Full HD16
−313%
66
+313%
1440p1−2
−3300%
34
+3300%
4K0−116

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−1700%
72
+1700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−800%
50−55
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−1150%
50−55
+1150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−1250%
54
+1250%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−2750%
55−60
+2750%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−2067%
65−70
+2067%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−4733%
140−150
+4733%
Hitman 3 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−660%
110−120
+660%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3100%
60−65
+3100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−950%
80−85
+950%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−212%
100−110
+212%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−800%
50−55
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−1150%
50−55
+1150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−750%
34
+750%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−2750%
55−60
+2750%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−2067%
65−70
+2067%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−4733%
140−150
+4733%
Hitman 3 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−660%
110−120
+660%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3100%
60−65
+3100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−1238%
107
+1238%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
−253%
50−55
+253%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−212%
100−110
+212%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−800%
50−55
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−1150%
50−55
+1150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−650%
30
+650%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−2750%
55−60
+2750%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−4733%
140−150
+4733%
Hitman 3 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−513%
92
+513%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−938%
83
+938%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−391%
54
+391%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+32%
25
−32%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3100%
60−65
+3100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−2250%
45−50
+2250%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−1800%
35−40
+1800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−2500%
24−27
+2500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 27−30
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1600%
17
+1600%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−1300%
27−30
+1300%
Hitman 3 7−8
−314%
27−30
+314%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−1220%
66
+1220%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
−1900%
140−150
+1900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−925%
40−45
+925%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1800%
18−20
+1800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−500%
6
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 14−16
Far Cry 5 0−1 14−16

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−600%
21−24
+600%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 51
+0%
51
+0%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 43
+0%
43
+0%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 31
+0%
31
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 23
+0%
23
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Metro Exodus 57
+0%
57
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 56
+0%
56
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hitman 3 10
+0%
10
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 25
+0%
25
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10
+0%
10
+0%

This is how GT 630M and RX 6500 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6500 XT is 1479% faster in 900p
  • RX 6500 XT is 313% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6500 XT is 3300% faster in 1440p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 630M is 32% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 6500 XT is 4733% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 630M is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • RX 6500 XT is ahead in 48 tests (70%)
  • there's a draw in 20 tests (29%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.39 24.80
Recency 22 March 2012 19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 107 Watt

GT 630M has 224.2% lower power consumption.

RX 6500 XT, on the other hand, has a 1684.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6500 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 630M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 630M is a notebook card while Radeon RX 6500 XT is a desktop 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 630M
GeForce GT 630M
AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT
Radeon RX 6500 XT

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.


3.3 888 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 3206 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6500 XT 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.