AMD Radeon RX 6400 vs Intel UHD Graphics P630 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 and Intel UHD Graphics P630 occupy opposite ends of the graphics spectrum, and the benchmark data reflects a decisive gap in capability. The RX 6400, a discrete RDNA 2.0 part, holds an average benchmark score of 6001, placing it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel integrated solution scores 5370, sitting in the 31st percentile. The head-to-head results show the AMD card leading by 526.3% in Geekbench OpenCL and by 190.9% in Geekbench Vulkan, making it the clear choice for any task requiring dedicated graphics processing, while the Intel part serves only the most basic display needs.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 6400 is the only viable option for gaming, content creation, or any GPU-accelerated workload. Its two head-to-head wins are emphatic, with OpenCL performance reaching 32011 versus 5111, and Vulkan scores hitting 16372 versus 5628. The RX 6400 also offers dedicated 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Intel UHD Graphics P630 relies on System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth. For users who need a functional display output for office work or media playback on a low-power system, the Intel P630 can suffice, given its 15 W TDP and IGP form factor. However, the RX 6400, with its 53 W TDP and single-slot design, delivers 7.7 times the OpenCL performance, making it the only rational pick when any 3D rendering or compute task is on the table. The Intel part wins zero head-to-head comparisons, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 M445 (0.2% slower) and NVIDIA GeForce 840M (0.9% faster), all of which are far below the RX 6400's performance class.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 scores 6001 on average, which is 631 points higher than the Intel UHD Graphics P630's 5370, a difference of roughly 11.7%.

Q: How much faster is the RX 6400 in OpenCL compute?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6400 scores 32011 versus 5111 for the Intel P630, a delta of 526.3%. This means the AMD card delivers over six times the compute throughput.

Q: Does the Intel UHD Graphics P630 have any dedicated video memory?

A: No, the Intel part uses System Shared memory with a System Shared bus width and System Dependent bandwidth, meaning it has no dedicated VRAM of its own.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between these two chips?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 contains 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 does not have a listed transistor count or die size in the database.

Q: Which card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Only the AMD Radeon RX 6400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Intel UHD Graphics P630 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: What are the nearest rivals to each card based on average score?

A: The RX 6400's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M at 6000 (0% delta), while the Intel P630's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M445 at 5358 (0.2% delta).

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is fundamental. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 uses the Navi 24 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. This is a discrete GPU with 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation pipelines. Crucially, it includes 12 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Intel part. The Intel UHD Graphics P630, in contrast, is built on the Comet Lake GT2 chip using Generation 9.5 architecture, fabricated on Intel's 14 nm+++ process. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and just 3 ROPs. The Intel chip has no ray tracing cores, reflecting its design as a basic display solution rather than a gaming or compute device.

The process node difference is stark: 6 nm versus 14 nm+++, which contributes to the RX 6400's higher transistor density of 50.5 million transistors per square millimeter. The RX 6400 also has a dedicated memory interface with 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, while the Intel P630 shares system memory with no dedicated VRAM. The bus interface also differs, with the AMD card using PCIe 4.0 x4 and the Intel part using a Ring Bus architecture. These architectural choices explain why the RX 6400 achieves 3.565 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel P630 manages only 460.8 GFLOPS, a 7.7-fold difference.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal a wide gap in nearly every measurable category. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 has a base clock of 1923 MHz, a boost clock of 2321 MHz, and a game clock of 2039 MHz, whereas the Intel UHD Graphics P630 operates at a 350 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost. Memory bandwidth favors the AMD card at 128.0 GB/s, while the Intel part's bandwidth is System Dependent. The RX 6400's pixel rate is 74.27 GPixel/s and texture rate is 111.4 GTexel/s, compared to the Intel's 3.600 GPixel/s and 28.80 GTexel/s. The AMD card also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Intel part is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Power consumption differs significantly: the RX 6400 has a 53 W TDP with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the Intel P630 has a 15 W TDP and is an IGP with no slot width. The RX 6400 is a single-slot card with 1x HDMI 2.1 and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, whereas the Intel P630's display outputs are Motherboard Dependent. The AMD card has a launch MSRP of 159 USD, while the Intel part has no listed launch MSRP. The RX 6400 was released on 2022-01-18, while the Intel P630 came earlier on 2020-05-12. Both are marked as end-of-life products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two shared benchmark tests, and the AMD Radeon RX 6400 wins both decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6400 scores 32011, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 scores 5111. The delta is 526.3%, meaning the AMD card is more than six times faster in this compute workload. This result aligns with the architectural differences: the RX 6400's 768 shading units and dedicated GDDR6 memory provide a massive advantage over the Intel's 192 shading units and shared memory. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6400 scores 16372 versus 5628 for the Intel part, a delta of 190.9%. This narrower but still substantial gap suggests that the Intel part handles API overhead relatively better, but it still loses by nearly threefold.

The RX 6400 also has additional benchmark scores that the Intel part lacks, including 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 176, Passmark G3D at 7673, and Passmark GPU Compute at 2812. The Intel P630 has no scores for these tests, which limits direct comparison but reinforces the idea that the integrated GPU is not designed for such workloads. The wins tally is 2 for the RX 6400 and 0 for the Intel P630, with no contested tests. The percentile ranking also favors the AMD card: 35th versus 31st, a modest overall gap but one that understates the extreme differences in peak performance.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 wins in every scenario that involves 3D rendering, GPU compute, or gaming. Its OpenCL score of 32011 makes it suitable for tasks like video encoding, scientific simulations, and machine learning inference, where the Intel P630's 5111 score would be a bottleneck. The Vulkan score of 16372 also positions the RX 6400 for modern game engines that leverage Vulkan's low overhead, while the Intel's 5628 would struggle with anything beyond basic 2D titles. The RX 6400's dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory ensures that textures and buffers remain in fast VRAM, avoiding the system memory latency that hampers the Intel part.

The Intel UHD Graphics P630 only wins in scenarios where power consumption and form factor are paramount. Its 15 W TDP is less than a third of the RX 6400's 53 W, making it suitable for ultra-portable laptops or low-power embedded systems where battery life is critical. As an IGP with no slot width and motherboard-dependent outputs, it integrates directly into the CPU package, requiring no additional hardware. For basic desktop productivity, 4K video playback, or legacy applications that rely on DirectX 12 (12_1) or Vulkan 1.3, the Intel part is sufficient. However, the data shows no benchmark where the Intel P630 outperforms the RX 6400, so its wins are purely contextual: thermal constraints, physical space, or power budgets, not raw performance.