UHD Graphics 630 vs Radeon R7 350

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 350 and UHD Graphics 630, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 350
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
5.58
+80.6%

R7 350 outperforms UHD Graphics 630 by an impressive 81% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking600758
Place by popularitynot in top-10040
Power efficiency7.0714.36
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameCape VerdeComet Lake GT2
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date6 July 2016 (8 years ago)1 October 2017 (7 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 cores512184
Core clock speed800 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1150 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate25.6026.45
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPS0.4232 TFLOPS
ROPs163
TMUs3223

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x1
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1125 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth72 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 outputs
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 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.103

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 HD27−30
+68.8%
16
−68.8%
1440p18−20
+80%
10
−80%
4K12−14
+71.4%
7
−71.4%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5
+0%
5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7
+0%
7
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 10
+0%
10
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 7
+0%
7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 9
+0%
9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Hitman 3 6
+0%
6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 13
+0%
13
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9
+0%
9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
+0%
16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30
+0%
30
+0%

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 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27
+0%
27
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12
+0%
12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+0%
15
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 28
+0%
28
+0%

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
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
+0%
11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
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 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
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 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

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%
1−2
+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 R7 350 and UHD Graphics 630 compete in popular games:

  • R7 350 is 69% faster in 1080p
  • R7 350 is 80% faster in 1440p
  • R7 350 is 71% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.58 3.09
Recency 6 July 2016 1 October 2017
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 15 Watt

R7 350 has a 80.6% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics 630, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 266.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 350 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 630 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.


AMD Radeon R7 350
Radeon R7 350
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.


3.8 477 votes

Rate Radeon R7 350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 3833 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.