elreydelaswasas1
Posts: 38 +0
Last year that where manufactured Graphic Cards worst for gaming than an Intel UHD Graphic 630 iGPU?
Last year that where manufactured Graphic Cards worst for gaming than an Intel UHD Graphic 630 iGPU?
- Thread starter elreydelaswasas1
- Start date
So the UHD Graphics 630 GPU has 184 shader units, 23 textures, and 3 render output units. No discrete graphics card has ever had quite the exact same configuration, but if one goes back to 2014, AMD had the Radeon R5 230 which sported 160 shader units, 8 textures units, and 2 render outputs - the UHD 630 has more floating point, texture rate, pixel output, and memory bandwidth performance than the R5 230.
The 630 actually has better floating point and texturing performance than a GeForce GT 710 (released the same year as the R5 240), but a lower pixel output rate. One can see this in a couple of 3DMark Wild Life test results:
UHD Graphics 630: https://www.3dmark.com/wl/116270
GeForce GT 710: https://www.3dmark.com/wl/136677
The former gets an average frame rate of 21.7 fps, whereas the latter gets 16.4 fps - 24% slower. In the more complex Fire Strike test, though, the difference is a little more pronounced:
UHD Graphics 630: https://www.3dmark.com/fs/23451939
GeForce GT 710: https://www.3dmark.com/fs/26689134
The former achieved an average of 8.6 fps in the second graphics test, on average, whereas the 710 got 5.4 fps - 37% slower.
Not that one would want to play a game with any of those frame rates. For that, one needs to look at the Night Raid test results (a benchmark which is very basic, in terms of graphics complexity):
UHD Graphics 630: https://www.3dmark.com/nr/42812
GeForce GT 710: https://www.3dmark.com/nr/559863
39.7 vs 20.4 fps is quite remarkable. So, to answer the original question, one needs to go back to 2014 and look at the absolutely worst graphics cards launched that year to see a UHD Graphics 630 beating them.
The 630 actually has better floating point and texturing performance than a GeForce GT 710 (released the same year as the R5 240), but a lower pixel output rate. One can see this in a couple of 3DMark Wild Life test results:
UHD Graphics 630: https://www.3dmark.com/wl/116270
GeForce GT 710: https://www.3dmark.com/wl/136677
The former gets an average frame rate of 21.7 fps, whereas the latter gets 16.4 fps - 24% slower. In the more complex Fire Strike test, though, the difference is a little more pronounced:
UHD Graphics 630: https://www.3dmark.com/fs/23451939
GeForce GT 710: https://www.3dmark.com/fs/26689134
The former achieved an average of 8.6 fps in the second graphics test, on average, whereas the 710 got 5.4 fps - 37% slower.
Not that one would want to play a game with any of those frame rates. For that, one needs to look at the Night Raid test results (a benchmark which is very basic, in terms of graphics complexity):
UHD Graphics 630: https://www.3dmark.com/nr/42812
GeForce GT 710: https://www.3dmark.com/nr/559863
39.7 vs 20.4 fps is quite remarkable. So, to answer the original question, one needs to go back to 2014 and look at the absolutely worst graphics cards launched that year to see a UHD Graphics 630 beating them.
Similar threads
