AMD Radeon RX 5700 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 is starkly one-sided. Across the two shared benchmark tests recorded in the database, the AMD Radeon RX 5700 secures a clean sweep, winning both head-to-head matchups.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 5700 scores 69,603, while the GTX 1630 manages only 24,858. This represents a delta of -64.3% from the AMD card's perspective, meaning the GTX 1630 trails by nearly two-thirds. The margin is enormous, and it is not a narrow victory or a photo finish; the RX 5700 more than doubles the GTX 1630's raw compute output in this API.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story. The RX 5700 posts 64,166, compared to the GTX 1630's 23,695, a delta of -63.1%. Again, the AMD part leads by a wide margin, demonstrating that the performance gap is not confined to a single API or workload type. Both OpenCL and Vulkan show the same fundamental hierarchy: the RX 5700 is in a completely different performance class.

When looking at the overall average benchmark scores, the picture becomes more nuanced but still favors AMD. The GTX 1630 has an average score of 24,277, which places it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs. The RX 5700, despite winning both head-to-head tests, has a lower average score of 22,170, sitting in the 67th percentile. This discrepancy is explained by the broader set of tests recorded for the RX 5700, which includes several Passmark tests where its scores are relatively modest. For instance, the RX 5700 scores 87 in Passmark DirectX 10, 101 in DirectX 11, and 54 in DirectX 12. These legacy or synthetic workloads drag down its average, even though its Geekbench numbers are dominant.

The GTX 1630's nearest rivals in the database are informative. It sits within 0.7% of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT, 0.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER, and 0.2% of the GeForce GTX 780 Ti. This clustering around the 24,000 to 24,400 score range suggests the GTX 1630 is a solid performer relative to its own generation. The RX 5700, on the other hand, is bracketed by the RX 6700S (0.1% ahead), the RTX 5060 Mobile (1.2% ahead), and the GTX 1060 6 GB (1.4% behind). The RX 5700's average is dragged down by its Passmark results, but its peak performance in Geekbench is far higher than any score the GTX 1630 can produce.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing eras. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 is built on the Turing architecture, specifically the TU117 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. The die measures 200 mm² and contains 4,700 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 23.5 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 uses the RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 10 chip, also produced by TSMC but on a much more advanced 7 nm node. Its die is larger at 251 mm², but it packs 10,300 million transistors, achieving a density of 41.0 million per square millimeter. The node advantage is clear: AMD fits more than twice the transistors into a die that is only about 25% larger.

The compute resources differ by a factor of roughly four. The GTX 1630 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The RX 5700, in contrast, fields 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. These raw counts translate directly into throughput figures. The GTX 1630 delivers 1.828 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the RX 5700 achieves 7.949 TFLOPS. The AMD card is over four times faster in raw floating-point performance. The same ratio holds for texture and pixel rates: the RX 5700 produces 248.4 GTexel/s versus 57.12 GTexel/s, and 110.4 GPixel/s versus 28.56 GPixel/s.

Memory configurations are equally divergent. The GTX 1630 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 5700 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s. That is nearly 4.7 times the memory bandwidth, a critical factor for modern games and compute workloads that are increasingly bandwidth-bound. The memory clocks also differ: the GTX 1630 runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective), while the RX 5700 runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

Clock speeds tell an interesting story. The GTX 1630 has a higher base clock at 1740 MHz and a boost clock of 1785 MHz. The RX 5700 has a lower base clock of 1465 MHz and a boost of 1725 MHz, but it also lists a game clock of 1625 MHz. Despite lower clocks, the RX 5700's massive advantage in shader count and memory bandwidth overwhelms the GTX 1630's clock speed lead. The GTX 1630's higher clocks are a classic sign of a small, efficient chip pushed to its limits, while the RX 5700 relies on brute parallelism.

Power consumption reflects these architectural choices. The GTX 1630 has a TDP of 75 W, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. It is a single-slot card measuring 145 mm in length. The RX 5700 has a TDP of 180 W, needs a 6-pin and an 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 450 W PSU. It is a dual-slot card at 268 mm long. The RX 5700 is physically larger, hungrier, and more demanding, but that is the price of its performance envelope.

Bus interfaces also differ: the GTX 1630 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RX 5700 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. This matters for data transfer speeds, though the practical impact depends on the workload. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature parity is maintained. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so those features are absent from both.

Where Each One Wins

The data paints a clear picture of distinct use cases. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 is the obvious choice for any workload that demands raw compute throughput, high memory bandwidth, or high-resolution textures. Its 8 GB frame buffer and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for modern games at higher settings and resolutions, as well as compute tasks like OpenCL rendering or Vulkan-based applications. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 69,603 is more than double the GTX 1630's 24,858, and the Vulkan score of 64,166 versus 23,695 shows the same dominance. If the task is GPU-intensive, the RX 5700 wins by a wide margin.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630, however, has its own niche. Its 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors mean it can be dropped into almost any existing system without worrying about PSU upgrades or cable management. Its single-slot, 145 mm length design fits in small form factor cases where the RX 5700's 268 mm dual-slot body would not. For a basic display output card, a media PC, or a light-gaming machine, the GTX 1630 is far more practical. Its higher base and boost clocks (1740 MHz and 1785 MHz) suggest it can handle lighter loads responsively, and its 4 GB GDDR6 memory is adequate for less demanding titles.

The benchmark averages also hint at a different strength profile. The RX 5700's average of 22,170 is pulled down by its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 209 and DirectX 10 score of 87, which are low relative to its Geekbench numbers. This suggests the RX 5700 may be less optimized for older DirectX APIs, while its Passmark DirectX 11 score of 101 and DirectX 12 score of 54 are also modest. The GTX 1630, with a higher percentile rank (70th vs 67th) and a higher average score (24,277 vs 22,170), appears more consistent across the limited set of tests it was run through. However, that consistency does not translate into a win in any head-to-head test.

For gaming, the RX 5700 is the data-backed victor. For general desktop use, video playback, or low-power setups, the GTX 1630 is the more sensible fit. The RX 5700's 180 W TDP and 450 W PSU requirement are significant hurdles for budget or office builds.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 has an average benchmark score of 24,277, which is higher than the AMD Radeon RX 5700's average of 22,170.

Q: How much faster is the RX 5700 in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The RX 5700 scores 64,166 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the GTX 1630 scores 23,695. This is a delta of -63.1% for the GTX 1630, meaning the AMD card is roughly 2.7 times faster.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The GTX 1630 has a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 5700 has a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5700 offers nearly 4.7 times the memory bandwidth.

Q: Does the RX 5700 support PCIe 4.0?

A: Yes, the RX 5700 uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface, while the GTX 1630 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The RX 5700 has a transistor density of 41.0M per mm², significantly higher than the GTX 1630's 23.5M per mm², due to its 7 nm process versus the GTX 1630's 12 nm process.

Q: What is the TDP of each card?

A: The GTX 1630 has a TDP of 75 W and requires no power connectors, while the RX 5700 has a TDP of 180 W and requires a 6-pin and an 8-pin power connector.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 is the superior performer in every head-to-head benchmark recorded. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 69,603 and Vulkan score of 64,166 dwarf the GTX 1630's 24,858 and 23,695 respectively. For anyone who needs computational horsepower, whether for gaming, rendering, or compute workloads, the RX 5700 is the only logical pick from these two.

The GTX 1630, however, is not without merit. Its average benchmark score of 24,277 is higher than the RX 5700's 22,170, and it sits in a higher percentile (70th vs 67th). This indicates that in the narrow set of tests where both cards have data, the GTX 1630 is more consistent. Its 75 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors make it a drop-in solution for systems with limited power delivery or physical space. Its 145 mm length is less than half that of the RX 5700's 268 mm.

The choice comes down to intent. If the goal is maximum performance per watt of system effort, the RX 5700 wins decisively. If the goal is a low-profile, low-power card for basic tasks, the GTX 1630 is the rational selection. The RX 5700's launch MSRP was 349 USD, which is a historical data point. The GTX 1630 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

For a gamer or content creator, the RX 5700's 8 GB memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are essential for modern workloads. For a home theater PC or office machine, the GTX 1630's minimal power draw and compact size are ideal. The benchmark data does not equivocate: performance favors AMD, practicality favors NVIDIA.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 | AMD Radeon RX 5700 |

|----------------|-------------------------|---------------------|

| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 4,700 million | 10,300 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 251 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 23.5M / mm² | 41.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1740 MHz | 1465 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1785 MHz | 1725 MHz |

| Game Clock | N/A | 1625 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 2,304 |

| TMUs | 32 | 144 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 28.56 GPixel/s | 110.4 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 57.12 GTexel/s | 248.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.828 TFLOPS | 7.949 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.656 TFLOPS (2:1) | 15.90 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 180 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions (L x H x W) | 145 mm x 69 mm x 18 mm | 268 mm x 111 mm x 36 mm |

| Release Date | 2022-06-27 | 2019-07-06 |