HD Graphics P630 vs Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS with HD Graphics P630, including specs and performance data.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS
40 Watt
10.85
+248%

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS outperforms HD Graphics P630 by a whopping 248% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking425762
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency18.6714.32
Architectureno dataGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameno dataKaby Lake GT2
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release dateno data5 August 2016 (8 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 cores1536192
Core clock speedno data350 MHz
Boost clock speed1500 MHz1100 MHz
Number of transistorsno data189 million
Manufacturing process technology4 nm14 nm++
Power consumption (TDP)40 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rateno data26.40
Floating-point processing powerno data0.4224 TFLOPS
ROPsno data3
TMUsno data24

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 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 typeLPDDR5xDDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amountno data1740 MB
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speed8448 MHzSystem 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 Connectorsno dataNo 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_112 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1
Vulkan-1.1.103

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 HD39
+290%
10−12
−290%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 23
+109%
10−12
−109%
Elden Ring 30−35
+433%
6−7
−433%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+350%
8−9
−350%
Counter-Strike 2 22
+100%
10−12
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 56
+300%
14−16
−300%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+400%
6−7
−400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+164%
10−12
−164%
Valorant 40−45
+2000%
2−3
−2000%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+350%
8−9
−350%
Counter-Strike 2 19
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
Dota 2 36
+300%
9−10
−300%
Elden Ring 30−35
+433%
6−7
−433%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+159%
16−18
−159%
Fortnite 60−65
+276%
16−18
−276%
Forza Horizon 4 48
+243%
14−16
−243%
Grand Theft Auto V 36
+300%
9−10
−300%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+400%
6−7
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+200%
27−30
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+164%
10−12
−164%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Valorant 40−45
+2000%
2−3
−2000%
World of Tanks 150−160
+182%
55−60
−182%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+350%
8−9
−350%
Counter-Strike 2 17
+54.5%
10−12
−54.5%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+159%
16−18
−159%
Forza Horizon 4 41
+193%
14−16
−193%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+200%
27−30
−200%
Valorant 40−45
+2000%
2−3
−2000%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Elden Ring 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
World of Tanks 75−80
+259%
21−24
−259%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+200%
8−9
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Valorant 27−30
+170%
10−11
−170%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Dota 2 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Elden Ring 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+40%
14−16
−40%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+256%
9−10
−256%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Fortnite 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16 0−1
Valorant 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS and HD Graphics P630 compete in popular games:

  • Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is 290% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is 2400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is ahead in 49 tests (84%)
  • there's a draw in 9 tests (16%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.85 3.12
Chip lithography 4 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 40 Watt 15 Watt

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS has a 247.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

HD Graphics P630, on the other hand, has 166.7% lower power consumption.

The Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics P630 in performance tests.

Be aware that Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is a notebook card while HD Graphics P630 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.


Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS
SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS
Intel HD Graphics P630
HD Graphics P630

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.


2.1 13 votes

Rate Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 19 votes

Rate HD Graphics P630 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.