Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) vs HD Graphics P630

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics P630 and Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics P630
2016
1740 MB DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4, 15 Watt
3.10
+13.1%

HD Graphics P630 outperforms R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) by a moderate 13% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking752795
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.76no data
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)GCN (2012−2015)
GPU code nameKaby Lake GT2Kaveri Spectre
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date5 August 2016 (8 years ago)14 January 2014 (10 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 cores192384
Core clock speed350 MHz720 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm++28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate26.40no data
Floating-point processing power0.4224 TFLOPSno data
ROPs3no data
TMUs24no data

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 3.0 x1no data
WidthIGPno 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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4no data
Maximum RAM amount1740 MBno data
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno data
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 outputsno data

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)12 (FL 12_0)
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.1no data
Vulkan1.1.103-

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 HD14−16
+0%
14
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+9.5%
21−24
−9.5%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+2.6%
35−40
−2.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+9.5%
21−24
−9.5%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+2.6%
35−40
−2.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+9.5%
21−24
−9.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+2.6%
35−40
−2.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how HD Graphics P630 and R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD Graphics P630 is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD Graphics P630 is ahead in 34 tests (57%)
  • there's a draw in 26 tests (43%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.10 2.74
Recency 5 August 2016 14 January 2014
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm

HD Graphics P630 has a 13.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The HD Graphics P630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) in performance tests.


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 P630
HD Graphics P630
AMD Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

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.


2.9 19 votes

Rate HD Graphics P630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 21 vote

Rate Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 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.