GeForce GT 320M vs HD Graphics 630

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking758not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.41no data
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameKaby Lake GT2G96C
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 January 2017 (7 years ago)15 June 2009 (15 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 cores19232
Core clock speed350 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm++55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt14 Watt
Texture fill rate24.008.000
Floating-point processing power0.384 TFLOPS0.08 TFLOPS
ROPs38
TMUs2416

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
InterfaceRing BusMXM-II
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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount64 GB512 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data25.6 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo 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)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL3.01.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA-1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

HD Graphics 630 1197
+1040%
GT 320M 105

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.

HD Graphics 630 7685
+538%
GT 320M 1205

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 January 2017 15 June 2009
Maximum RAM amount 64 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 14 Watt

HD Graphics 630 has an age advantage of 7 years, a 12700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 320M, on the other hand, has 7.1% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between HD Graphics 630 and GeForce GT 320M. We've got no test results to judge.


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 HD Graphics 630
HD Graphics 630
NVIDIA GeForce GT 320M
GeForce GT 320M

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.


3.2 1221 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 122 votes

Rate GeForce GT 320M 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.