Intel UHD Graphics 630 vs AMD Radeon R7 250

Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 630 and AMD Radeon R7 250 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. 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 Intel UHD Graphics 630

• Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 10 month(s) later
• Around 14% higher boost clock speed: 1200 MHz vs 1050 MHz
• Around 29% higher texture fill rate: 28.8 GTexel / s vs 22.4 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: 15 Watt vs 75 Watt
• Around 18% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1237 vs 1051
• Around 6% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 299 vs 283
• Around 36% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 27.517 vs 20.161
• Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 354.254 vs 304.279
• Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.807 vs 1.655

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 250

• 16x more pipelines: 384 vs 24
• Around 56% better floating-point performance: 716.8 gflops vs 460.8 gflops
• Around 62% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 7525 vs 4657
• Around 48% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 30.046 vs 20.323
• 3.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 96.934 vs 29.327
• Around 17% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2179 vs 1870
• Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3170 vs 1596
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 vs 3309
• Around 17% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2179 vs 1870
• Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3170 vs 1596
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 vs 3309

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 630
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 250

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1237 1051
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	299 283
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	4657 7525
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	27.517 20.161
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	354.254 304.279
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.807 1.655
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	20.323 30.046
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	29.327 96.934
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1870 2179
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1596 3170
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3309 3356
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1870 2179
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1596 3170
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3309 3356

Compare specifications (specs)