AMD Radeon 630 vs AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon 630 and AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition 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: GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), Geekbench - OpenCL, PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon 630
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- Around 27% higher core clock speed: 1082 MHz vs 850 MHz
- 358.3x more texture fill rate: 38.98 GTexel/s vs 108.8 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 5x lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 250 Watt
- Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3720 vs 2852
- 80.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3720 vs 46
- 26.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3361 vs 125.7
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 May 2019 vs 23 November 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 1082 MHz vs 850 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 38.98 GTexel/s vs 108.8 GTexel / s |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt vs 250 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 vs 2852 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 vs 46 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3361 vs 125.7 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
- 4x more pipelines: 2048 vs 512
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- 3.1x more memory clock speed: 5448 MHz vs 1750 MHz (7000 MHz effective)
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 7037 vs 3361
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Pipelines | 2048 vs 512 |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 5448 MHz vs 1750 MHz (7000 MHz effective) |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 7037 vs 3361 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon 630
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon 630 | AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition |
|---|---|---|
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3467 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3467 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 | 2852 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 | 46 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3361 | 7037 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3361 | 125.7 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9651 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 221 | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1269 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 71.778 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1285.141 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.839 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 75.347 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 321.767 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon 630 | AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 3.0 |
| Code name | Polaris 23 | Amethyst |
| Launch date | 13 May 2019 | 23 November 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 759 | 897 |
| Type | Desktop | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1218 MHz | |
| Compute units | 8 | |
| Core clock speed | 1082 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 77.95 GFLOPS (1:16) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 1247 GFLOPS (1:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 1247 GFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 512 | 2048 |
| Pixel fill rate | 19.49 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 38.98 GTexel/s | 108.8 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Transistor count | 2200 million | 5,000 million |
| Floating-point performance | 3,482 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| HDMI | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Length | 5.7 inches (145 mm) | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
| Width | Dual-slot | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (12_0) |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 174.3 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz (7000 MHz effective) | 5448 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon 630 with others
AMDRadeon 630 vs
ATIMobility Radeon X1700
AMDRadeon 630 vs
ATIRadeon HD 5850
AMDRadeon 630 vs
NVIDIATesla M2070-Q
AMDRadeon 630 vs
NVIDIATesla C2070
AMDRadeon 630 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5100M
AMDRadeon 630 vs
NVIDIAGRID K520
