AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear overall winner: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 takes both head-to-head benchmark victories, with the largest margin appearing in OpenCL compute workloads. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 1630 scores 24,858 against the RX Vega M GL’s 19,549, a decisive 27.2% advantage. This is not a narrow win; the delta is substantial enough to indicate a meaningful performance gap in general-purpose compute tasks that leverage OpenCL.

The Vulkan result is far closer. The GTX 1630 posts 23,695, while the RX Vega M GL records 22,757, giving NVIDIA a 4.1% edge. This narrower margin suggests that in graphics-oriented APIs, the AMD part is competitive and the difference shrinks considerably. Still, the GTX 1630 wins outright, and the overall tally stands at 2 wins for NVIDIA and 0 for AMD.

Context from the nearest rivals strengthens the interpretation. The GTX 1630’s average benchmark score is 24,277, placing it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti, scores 24,236, a mere 0.2% difference. The GTX 1630 also edges out the RTX 2080 SUPER (24,170, 0.4% ahead) and the RX 6800S (24,063, 0.9% ahead), while trailing the RX 6600 XT (24,442) by 0.7%. The picture is a GPU that sits in a tight cluster of high-end performers, with its average score within 1% of several much more expensive or higher-tier parts.

The RX Vega M GL’s average score is 21,153, which lands in the 66th percentile. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon HD 8970M, scores 21,237, a 0.4% difference. The RTX 5050 is 0.6% behind at 21,035, and the RTX A4000 Mobile trails by 1.1% at 21,379. The RX 5600 XT is 2.1% ahead at 20,713, which is a notable gap in the opposite direction. These figures show the Vega M GL performing in a mid-range band, but the 27.2% OpenCL deficit to the GTX 1630 is the single largest delta in either card’s rival set, underscoring that this is not a close matchup in compute-heavy scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies and process nodes. The GTX 1630 is built on NVIDIA’s Turing architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 12 nm process, and uses the TU117 chip. The RX Vega M GL uses AMD’s GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm node, with the Polaris 22 die. The process difference is small in absolute terms, but the transistor counts tell a nuanced story: NVIDIA packs 4,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5 million per mm². AMD’s chip holds 5,000 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, a density of 24.0 million per mm². The AMD die is slightly larger and denser, yet it still falls behind in benchmark scores.

Core configurations diverge sharply. The GTX 1630 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The RX Vega M GL has far more: 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Higher raw counts do not translate into higher performance here, which points to architectural efficiency differences. The GTX 1630’s boost clock is 1,785 MHz with a base of 1,740 MHz, while the RX Vega M GL runs at a 931 MHz base and 1,011 MHz boost. The clock advantage is enormous for NVIDIA, roughly 1.8 times the boost frequency, and that largely compensates for the AMD part’s higher shader count.

Memory subsystems are completely different. The GTX 1630 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX Vega M GL uses 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1,024-bit bus, delivering 179.2 GB/s, nearly double the bandwidth. That memory advantage does not produce a win in either benchmark, suggesting the Vega M GL’s compute throughput is limited elsewhere. The GTX 1630’s FP32 throughput is 1.828 TFLOPS, and its FP16 throughput is 3.656 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The RX Vega M GL has 2.588 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, with a 1:1 ratio. AMD’s raw FP32 is 41.6% higher, yet the GTX 1630 still wins OpenCL by 27.2%. This indicates that the NVIDIA part’s execution efficiency, likely tied to its higher clocks and newer architecture, outweighs AMD’s wider SIMD arrays in these workloads.

Pixel and texture rates follow the core counts. The RX Vega M GL has a pixel rate of 32.35 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 80.88 GTexel/s, both higher than the GTX 1630’s 28.56 GPixel/s and 57.12 GTexel/s. The GTX 1630’s rates are lower, yet the benchmark results do not reflect a rasterization disadvantage in the recorded tests. Power draw differs: the GTX 1630 is rated at 75 W TDP with no power connectors, while the RX Vega M GL is rated at 65 W and is integrated into a package (IGP). The GTX 1630 is a single-slot, 145 mm long card; the Vega M GL has no standalone dimensions, as it is portable-device dependent.

API support is nearly matched but not identical. The GTX 1630 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX Vega M GL supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The GTX 1630 has a slightly higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version, which may contribute to its Vulkan benchmark edge.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 has an average benchmark score of 24,277, while the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL has 21,153. The GTX 1630 sits in the 70th percentile of all GPUs, and the RX Vega M GL sits in the 66th.

Q: How large is the OpenCL performance gap between the two?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 1630 scores 24,858 versus 19,549 for the RX Vega M GL, a 27.2% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Is the Vulkan result closer than OpenCL?

A: Yes. The GTX 1630 scores 23,695, and the RX Vega M GL scores 22,757, a 4.1% difference in favor of NVIDIA.

Q: How do the memory bandwidths compare?

A: The RX Vega M GL has 179.2 GB/s of bandwidth from 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1,024-bit bus. The GTX 1630 has 96.00 GB/s from 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. AMD has nearly double the bandwidth, but it does not win either benchmark.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The GTX 1630 is rated at 75 W and is a single-slot card with no power connectors. The RX Vega M GL is rated at 65 W and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no standalone dimensions.

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 throughput?

A: The RX Vega M GL has 2.588 TFLOPS of FP32, while the GTX 1630 has 1.828 TFLOPS. Despite this, the GTX 1630 wins the OpenCL benchmark by 27.2%.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 is the stronger performer in every recorded benchmark. It wins OpenCL by 27.2% and Vulkan by 4.1%, and its average score of 24,277 places it in the 70th percentile, a full 4 percentile points above the RX Vega M GL. The GTX 1630’s nearest rivals include the GTX 780 Ti, RTX 2080 SUPER, and RX 6600 XT, all within a 1% band, which shows that it holds its own against parts that are generally considered higher tier. The RX Vega M GL’s closest competitor is the HD 8970M, a mobile-oriented part, and its average score is 2.1% behind the RX 5600 XT. That places it in a lower performance class overall.

For users choosing between these two, the GTX 1630 is the pick for compute-heavy workloads, as the OpenCL result shows a decisive advantage. The Vulkan margin is smaller, but it still favors NVIDIA. The RX Vega M GL’s only notable advantages are its lower TDP (65 W versus 75 W), higher memory bandwidth, and higher raw FP32 throughput, but none of those translate into a benchmark win. The GTX 1630 also has a higher boost clock (1,785 MHz versus 1,011 MHz) and newer API support (Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.3, DirectX 12_1 versus 12_0). If raw performance is the criterion, the GTX 1630 is the clear winner.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 | AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL |

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

| Architecture | Turing | GCN 4.0 |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 4,700 million | 5,000 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 208 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 23.5M / mm² | 24.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1740 MHz | 931 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1785 MHz | 1011 MHz |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 1024 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 179.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 1280 |

| TMUs | 32 | 80 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 28.56 GPixel/s | 32.35 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 57.12 GTexel/s | 80.88 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.828 TFLOPS | 2.588 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.656 TFLOPS (2:1) | 2.588 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 65 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | (not applicable) |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | IGP |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Dimensions | 145 mm length, 69 mm height, 18 mm width | (none recorded) |

| Release Date | 2022-06-27 | 2018-01-31 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 wins in compute performance. The OpenCL benchmark shows a 27.2% lead, which is the largest recorded margin in this comparison. It also wins in Vulkan, albeit by a smaller 4.1%. Its average score is 14.8% higher than the RX Vega M GL’s, and it ranks in the 70th percentile versus the 66th. The GTX 1630 is also the faster clocked part, with a 1,785 MHz boost versus 1,011 MHz, and it supports newer API versions (Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12_1). Its single-slot design and standard PCIe 3.0 x16 interface make it a straightforward drop-in card for a desktop system.

The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL wins in memory bandwidth, at 179.2 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s, and in raw FP32 throughput, at 2.588 TFLOPS versus 1.828 TFLOPS. It also has more shading units (1,280 versus 512), more TMUs (80 versus 32), and more ROPs (32 versus 16), along with higher pixel and texture rates. Its TDP is lower at 65 W versus 75 W. These specifications do not translate into a benchmark victory in the recorded data, but they indicate that the Vega M GL is designed for integrated, power-constrained environments where bandwidth and shader count matter more than raw clock speed. For a portable device with an integrated GPU, the Vega M GL’s characteristics are relevant, but for performance-based comparisons, the GTX 1630 is the superior choice in every recorded test.