AMD Radeon 625 vs Intel HD Graphics 630

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon 625 and Intel HD Graphics 630 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon 625

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 8 month(s) later
• 2.1x more core clock speed: 730 MHz vs 350 MHz
• 890.6x more texture fill rate: 24.58 GTexel/s vs 27.6 GTexel / s
• 16x more pipelines: 384 vs 24
• Around 44% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 6656 vs 4615
• Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 322.556 vs 312.246
• Around 58% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 32.22 vs 20.404
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 70.423 vs 32.567
• Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2032 vs 1859
• Around 50% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2920 vs 1945
• Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2032 vs 1859
• Around 50% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2920 vs 1945

Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 630

• Around 12% higher boost clock speed: 1150 MHz vs 1024 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• 3.3x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 50 Watt
• 32x more maximum memory size: 64 GB vs 2 GB
• Around 2% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1108 vs 1085
• Around 28% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 267 vs 209
• Around 48% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 27.948 vs 18.876
• Around 21% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.795 vs 1.478
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3344 vs 3215
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3344 vs 3215

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon 625
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 630

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1085 1108
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	209 267
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	6656 4615
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	18.876 27.948
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	322.556 312.246
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.478 1.795
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	32.22 20.404
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	70.423 32.567
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2032 1859
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2920 1945
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3215 3344
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2032 1859
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2920 1945
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3215 3344

Compare specifications (specs)