UHD Graphics 630 vs Quadro 4000M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 4000M with UHD Graphics 630, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 4000M
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
3.37
+9.1%

4000M outperforms UHD Graphics 630 by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking728755
Place by popularitynot in top-10040
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.32no data
Power efficiency2.3314.27
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGF104Comet Lake GT2
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date22 February 2011 (13 years ago)1 October 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 no data

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 cores336184
Core clock speed475 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1150 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate26.6026.45
Floating-point processing power0.6384 TFLOPS0.4232 TFLOPS
ROPs323
TMUs5623

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x1
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed625 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth80 GB/sno 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 outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.1.103
CUDA2.1-

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.

Quadro 4000M 3.37
+9.1%
UHD Graphics 630 3.09

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.

Quadro 4000M 1302
+9.2%
UHD Graphics 630 1192

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.

Quadro 4000M 2092
+16.9%
UHD Graphics 630 1790

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.

Quadro 4000M 10722
+39.2%
UHD Graphics 630 7704

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 HD71
+373%
15
−373%
1440p10−12
+0%
10
+0%
4K7−8
+0%
7
+0%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.32no data
1440p44.90no data
4K64.14no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5
−20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+42.9%
7
−42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Battlefield 5 7−8
−42.9%
10
+42.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+0%
9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−57.9%
30
+57.9%
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+4.3%
21−24
−4.3%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−160%
13
+160%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−12.5%
9
+12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−23.1%
16
+23.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+33.3%
30
−33.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Battlefield 5 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−42.1%
27
+42.1%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+4.3%
21−24
−4.3%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+8.3%
12
−8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
15
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+42.9%
28
−42.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+11.8%
16−18
−11.8%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+4.3%
21−24
−4.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+18.2%
11
−18.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+2.6%
35−40
−2.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 20−22
+5.3%
18−20
−5.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
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%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how Quadro 4000M and UHD Graphics 630 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro 4000M is 373% faster in 1080p
  • A tie in 1440p
  • A tie in 4K

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

  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro 4000M is 100% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics 630 is 160% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro 4000M is ahead in 32 tests (52%)
  • UHD Graphics 630 is ahead in 6 tests (10%)
  • there's a draw in 24 tests (39%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.37 3.09
Recency 22 February 2011 1 October 2017
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 15 Watt

Quadro 4000M has a 9.1% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics 630, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 566.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro 4000M and UHD Graphics 630.

Be aware that Quadro 4000M is a mobile workstation card while UHD Graphics 630 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 Quadro 4000M
Quadro 4000M
Intel UHD Graphics 630
UHD Graphics 630

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 33 votes

Rate Quadro 4000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 3794 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 630 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.