Iris Plus Graphics G4 (Ice Lake 48 EU) vs Radeon 630

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 630 and Iris Plus Graphics G4 (Ice Lake 48 EU), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Radeon 630
2019
2 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
3.72

Iris Plus Graphics G4 (Ice Lake 48 EU) outperforms 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 ranking707691
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.1911.32
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code namePolaris 23Ice Lake G4 Gen. 11
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date13 May 2019 (5 years ago)28 May 2019 (5 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 cores51248
Core clock speed1082 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1218 MHz1100 MHz
Number of transistors2,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt12-25 Watt
Texture fill rate38.98no data
Floating-point processing power1.247 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no 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 x8no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5DDR4
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1750 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth112.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortno data
HDMI+-

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 (12_0)12_1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

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
−14.3%
16
+14.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−10%
11
+10%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−12.5%
9
+12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
Hitman 3 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−12.5%
27−30
+12.5%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−280%
19
+280%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−25%
10
+25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−7.5%
40−45
+7.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
Hitman 3 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−12.5%
27−30
+12.5%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−180%
14
+180%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−7.5%
40−45
+7.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
Hitman 3 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−12.5%
27−30
+12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+114%
7
−114%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−7.5%
40−45
+7.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 5−6
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 20−22
−25%
24−27
+25%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3 0−1 0−1
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1

This is how Radeon 630 and Iris Plus Graphics G4 (Ice Lake 48 EU) compete in popular games:

  • Iris Plus Graphics G4 (Ice Lake 48 EU) is 14% faster in 1080p

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 630 is 114% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Iris Plus Graphics G4 (Ice Lake 48 EU) is 280% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Radeon 630 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • Iris Plus Graphics G4 (Ice Lake 48 EU) is ahead in 55 tests (89%)
  • there's a draw in 6 tests (10%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.72 4.06
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 12 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics G4 (Ice Lake 48 EU) has a 9.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 316.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon 630 and Iris Plus Graphics G4 (Ice Lake 48 EU).


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.


AMD Radeon 630
Radeon 630
Intel Iris Plus Graphics G4 (Ice Lake 48 EU)
Iris Plus Graphics G4 (Ice Lake 48 EU)

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.


3.6 32 votes

Rate Radeon 630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 57 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics G4 (Ice Lake 48 EU) 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.