Radeon 880M vs HD Graphics 630

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 630 and Radeon 880M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics 630
2017
64 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4, 15 Watt
2.68

880M outperforms HD Graphics 630 by a whopping 547% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking773286
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.2392.09
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)RDNA 3.5 (2024)
GPU code nameKaby Lake GT2Strix Point
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 January 2017 (8 years ago)15 July 2024 (less than a year 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 cores192512
Core clock speed350 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz2900 MHz
Number of transistors189 million34,000 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm++4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate24.0092.80
Floating-point processing power0.384 TFLOPS2.97 TFLOPS
ROPs316
TMUs2432
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 BusPCIe 4.0 x8
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/LPDDR4System Shared
Maximum RAM amount64 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
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 DependentPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.1
Vulkan+1.3

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.

HD Graphics 630 2.68
Radeon 880M 17.35
+547%

  • Other tests
    • Passmark
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
    • 3DMark Time Spy Graphics

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
Radeon 880M 7759
+548%

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.

HD Graphics 630 1729
Radeon 880M 13892
+703%

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.

HD Graphics 630 1067
Radeon 880M 8371
+684%

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.

HD Graphics 630 9715
Radeon 880M 51662
+432%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

HD Graphics 630 368
Radeon 880M 3006
+717%

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 HD16
−125%
36
+125%
1440p64
+191%
22
−191%
4K13
−515%
80−85
+515%

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
Atomic Heart 7−8
−557%
46
+557%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−1088%
95
+1088%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−567%
40−45
+567%
Atomic Heart 7−8
−386%
34
+386%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−690%
75−80
+690%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−775%
70
+775%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−567%
40−45
+567%
Far Cry 5 6
−800%
54
+800%
Fortnite 24
−317%
100−105
+317%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−450%
75−80
+450%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
−1100%
60−65
+1100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−446%
70−75
+446%
Valorant 45−50
−209%
140−150
+209%
Atomic Heart 7−8
−200%
21
+200%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−690%
75−80
+690%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−388%
39
+388%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 55−60
−316%
220−230
+316%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−567%
40−45
+567%
Dota 2 26
−515%
160−170
+515%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−717%
49
+717%
Fortnite 14−16
−567%
100−105
+567%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−450%
75−80
+450%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
−1100%
60−65
+1100%
Grand Theft Auto V 4
−1250%
54
+1250%
Metro Exodus 2
−1900%
40−45
+1900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−446%
70−75
+446%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−489%
53
+489%
Valorant 45−50
−209%
140−150
+209%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−690%
75−80
+690%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−567%
40−45
+567%
Dota 2 22
−536%
140−150
+536%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−667%
46
+667%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−450%
75−80
+450%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−446%
70−75
+446%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−267%
33
+267%
Valorant 45−50
−209%
140−150
+209%
Fortnite 14−16
−567%
100−105
+567%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−1200%
35−40
+1200%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
−552%
130−140
+552%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
−1000%
22
+1000%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−2300%
24−27
+2300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
−576%
160−170
+576%
Valorant 27−30
−536%
170−180
+536%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−760%
40−45
+760%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−586%
45−50
+586%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−675%
30−35
+675%
Fortnite 5−6
−760%
40−45
+760%
Atomic Heart 2−3
−650%
14−16
+650%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−113%
30−35
+113%
Valorant 14−16
−613%
100−110
+613%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Dota 2 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−600%
21−24
+600%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−1550%
30−35
+1550%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−375%
18−20
+375%
Fortnite 4−5
−375%
18−20
+375%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how HD Graphics 630 and Radeon 880M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 880M is 125% faster in 1080p
  • HD Graphics 630 is 191% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 880M is 515% faster in 4K

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 880M is 2300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Radeon 880M is ahead in 54 tests (90%)
  • there's a draw in 6 tests (10%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.68 17.35
Recency 1 January 2017 15 July 2024
Chip lithography 14 nm 4 nm

Radeon 880M has a 547.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon 880M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 630 in performance tests.

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
AMD Radeon 880M
Radeon 880M

Other comparisons

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
1321 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3
13 votes

Rate Radeon 880M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about HD Graphics 630 or Radeon 880M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.