GeForce GTX 1630 vs Quadro K610M

Place in the ranking	913	388
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.16	no data
Power efficiency	4.32	12.02
Architecture	Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GK208	TU117
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	23 July 2013 (11 years ago)	28 June 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$229.99	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 cores	192	512
Core clock speed	980 MHz	1740 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1785 MHz
Number of transistors	915 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	15.68	57.12
Floating-point processing power	0.3763 TFLOPS	1.828 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	16
TMUs	16	32

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 size	medium sized	no data
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	no data	145 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	650 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	20.8 GB/s	96 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	No outputs	1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+
Display Port	1.2	no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.6
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	+	1.3
CUDA	+	7.5

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 K610M 1.86

GTX 1630 12.93
+595%

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 K610M 718

GTX 1630 4987
+595%

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

−582%

75−80
+582%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

20.91

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5
−575%

27−30

+575%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −575%	27−30 +575%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
Hitman 3	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −547%	110−120 +547%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −575%	27−30 +575%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −567%	60−65 +567%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −586%	240−250 +586%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −575%	27−30 +575%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
Hitman 3	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −547%	110−120 +547%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −575%	27−30 +575%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −567%	60−65 +567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −567%	80−85 +567%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −586%	240−250 +586%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −575%	27−30 +575%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
Hitman 3	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −547%	110−120 +547%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −567%	60−65 +567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −567%	80−85 +567%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −586%	240−250 +586%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
−575%

27−30

+575%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
Hitman 3	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 −550%	65−70 +550%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
−500%

30−33

+500%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−500%

6−7
+500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4
−500%

18−20

+500%

This is how Quadro K610M and GTX 1630 compete in popular games:

GTX 1630 is 582% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.86	12.93
Recency	23 July 2013	28 June 2022
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	75 Watt

Quadro K610M has 150% lower power consumption.

GTX 1630, on the other hand, has a 595.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K610M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K610M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 1630 is a desktop one.

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