Quadro K610M vs UHD Graphics 630

Place in the ranking	758	911
Place by popularity	40	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.16
Power efficiency	14.24	4.29
Architecture	Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)	Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code name	Comet Lake GT2	GK208
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	1 October 2017 (7 years ago)	23 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$229.99

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	184	192
Core clock speed	350 MHz	980 MHz
Boost clock speed	1150 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	189 million	915 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm+++	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	30 Watt
Texture fill rate	26.45	15.68
Floating-point processing power	0.4232 TFLOPS	0.3763 TFLOPS
ROPs	3	8
TMUs	23	16

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	no data	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x1	MXM-A (3.0)
Width	IGP	no 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 type	System Shared	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	1 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	650 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	20.8 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	No outputs
Display Port	no data	1.2

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	+
Quick Sync	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12
Shader Model	6.5	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	2.1	1.2
Vulkan	1.1.103	+
CUDA	-	+

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.

UHD Graphics 630 3.09
+66.1%

Quadro K610M 1.86

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.

UHD Graphics 630 1192
+66%

Quadro K610M 718

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.

UHD Graphics 630 1790
+56.5%

Quadro K610M 1144

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.

UHD Graphics 630 7704
+50.6%

Quadro K610M 5116

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

UHD Graphics 630 1211
+60.3%

Quadro K610M 756

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

UHD Graphics 630 9798
+67.8%

Quadro K610M 5838

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

UHD Graphics 630 19
+101%

Quadro K610M 9

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	16 +45.5%	11 −45.5%
1440p	10 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
4K	7 +75%	4−5 −75%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	20.91
1440p	no data	38.33
4K	no data	57.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5
+25%

4−5

−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7 +0%	7−8 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	10 +900%	1−2 −900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	7 +133%	3−4 −133%
Far Cry New Dawn	9 +80%	5−6 −80%
Forza Horizon 4	30 +329%	7−8 −329%
Hitman 3	6 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +35.3%	16−18 −35.3%
Metro Exodus	13 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9 +125%	4−5 −125%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30 −16.7%	35−40 +16.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Forza Horizon 4	27 +286%	7−8 −286%
Hitman 3	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +35.3%	16−18 −35.3%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12 +33.3%	9−10 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	15 +25%	12−14 −25%
Watch Dogs: Legion	28 −25%	35−40 +25%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +143%	7−8 −143%
Hitman 3	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +35.3%	16−18 −35.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	11 +22.2%	9−10 −22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +16.7%	12−14 −16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +11.4%	35−40 −11.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
+100%

4−5

−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 +90%	10−11 −90%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+20%

5−6

−20%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

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
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+33.3%

3−4

−33.3%

This is how UHD Graphics 630 and Quadro K610M compete in popular games:

UHD Graphics 630 is 45% faster in 1080p
UHD Graphics 630 is 67% faster in 1440p
UHD Graphics 630 is 75% faster in 4K

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

in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics 630 is 900% faster.
in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro K610M is 25% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

UHD Graphics 630 is ahead in 46 tests (87%)
Quadro K610M is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
there's a draw in 5 tests (9%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.09	1.86
Recency	1 October 2017	23 July 2013
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	30 Watt

UHD Graphics 630 has a 66.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K610M in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics 630 is a desktop card while Quadro K610M is a mobile workstation one.

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