Quadro M6000 24 GB vs HD Graphics 630

Place in the ranking	756	178
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	2.78
Power efficiency	14.41	8.59
Architecture	Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code name	Kaby Lake GT2	GM200
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	1 January 2017 (7 years ago)	5 March 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$4,999

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 cores	192	3072
Core clock speed	350 MHz	988 MHz
Boost clock speed	1000 MHz	1114 MHz
Number of transistors	189 million	8,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm++	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	250 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.00	285.2
Floating-point processing power	0.384 TFLOPS	6.844 TFLOPS
ROPs	3	96
TMUs	24	256

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).

Interface	Ring Bus	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 8-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 type	DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	64 GB	24 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	1653 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	317.4 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 Connectors

Portable Device Dependent

1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort

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.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	1.2
Vulkan	+	+
CUDA	-	5.2

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.

HD Graphics 630 3.10

M6000 24 GB 30.80
+894%

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

M6000 24 GB 11882
+893%

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 HD	14 −829%	130−140 +829%
4K	13 −823%	120−130 +823%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	38.45
4K	no data	41.66

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7
−817%

55−60

+817%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5 −800%	45−50 +800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Battlefield 5	6−7 −817%	55−60 +817%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 −829%	65−70 +829%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −817%	55−60 +817%
Far Cry 5	6 −817%	55−60 +817%
Far Cry New Dawn	8 −838%	75−80 +838%
Forza Horizon 4	20 −850%	190−200 +850%
Hitman 3	8−9 −838%	75−80 +838%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −857%	220−230 +857%
Metro Exodus	10 −850%	95−100 +850%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7 −829%	65−70 +829%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12 −817%	110−120 +817%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −797%	350−400 +797%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −844%	85−90 +844%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Battlefield 5	6−7 −817%	55−60 +817%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 −829%	65−70 +829%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −817%	55−60 +817%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −817%	55−60 +817%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 −838%	75−80 +838%
Forza Horizon 4	15 −833%	140−150 +833%
Hitman 3	8−9 −838%	75−80 +838%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −857%	220−230 +857%
Metro Exodus	4 −775%	35−40 +775%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −838%	75−80 +838%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −823%	120−130 +823%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16 −838%	150−160 +838%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −797%	350−400 +797%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −844%	85−90 +844%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 −829%	65−70 +829%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −817%	55−60 +817%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −817%	55−60 +817%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −841%	160−170 +841%
Hitman 3	8−9 −838%	75−80 +838%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −857%	220−230 +857%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −823%	120−130 +823%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −829%	130−140 +829%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −797%	350−400 +797%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
−838%

75−80

+838%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −800%	45−50 +800%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −800%	45−50 +800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −800%	27−30 +800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −800%	27−30 +800%
Hitman 3	8−9 −838%	75−80 +838%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −838%	75−80 +838%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 −847%	180−190 +847%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
−817%

55−60

+817%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
−775%

35−40

+775%

This is how HD Graphics 630 and M6000 24 GB compete in popular games:

M6000 24 GB is 829% faster in 1080p
M6000 24 GB is 823% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.10	30.80
Recency	1 January 2017	5 March 2016
Maximum RAM amount	64 GB	24 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	250 Watt

HD Graphics 630 has an age advantage of 9 months, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 1566.7% lower power consumption.

M6000 24 GB, on the other hand, has a 893.5% higher aggregate performance score.

The Quadro M6000 24 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 630 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 630 is a notebook card while Quadro M6000 24 GB is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.