GeForce GTX 1630 vs Radeon R9 270X
GeForce GTX 1630
Popular choices:
Radeon R9 270X
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1630
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1630 is significantly newer (2022 vs 2013). The GeForce GTX 1630 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon R9 270X lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1630 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.4% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 270X.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1630 | Radeon R9 270X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.4%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.4%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R9 270X offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $40 versus $90 for the GeForce GTX 1630, it costs 56% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 119.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1630 | Radeon R9 270X |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+119.7%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($90) | ✅More affordable ($40) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1630 and Radeon R9 270X
GeForce GTX 1630
The GeForce GTX 1630 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 28 2022. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1740 MHz to 1785 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,992 points.
Radeon R9 270X
The Radeon R9 270X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 8 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1050 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 180W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,874 points. Launch price was $199.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1630 scores 4,992 and the Radeon R9 270X reaches 4,874 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1630 is built on Turing while the Radeon R9 270X uses GCN 1.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 512 (GeForce GTX 1630) vs 1,280 (Radeon R9 270X). Raw compute: 1.828 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1630) vs 2.688 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 270X). Boost clocks: 1785 MHz vs 1050 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1630 | Radeon R9 270X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,992+2% | 4,874 |
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 512 | 1280+150% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.828 TFLOPS | 2.688 TFLOPS+47% |
| Boost Clock | 1785 MHz+70% | 1050 MHz |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 32 | 80+150% |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB+60% | 320 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1630 | Radeon R9 270X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Memory bandwidth: 96 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1630) vs 179.2 GB/s (Radeon R9 270X) — a 86.7% advantage for the Radeon R9 270X. Bus width: 64-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1630) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 270X) — the GeForce GTX 1630 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1630 | Radeon R9 270X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 96 GB/s | 179.2 GB/s+87% |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 256-bit+300% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (GeForce GTX 1630) vs 12 (11_1) (Radeon R9 270X). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1630 | Radeon R9 270X |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12 (11_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.3+8% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6th gen (GeForce GTX 1630) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon R9 270X). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1630) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,MPEG-4 (Radeon R9 270X).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1630 | Radeon R9 270X |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6th gen | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1630 draws 75W versus the Radeon R9 270X's 180W — a 82.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 1630 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1630) vs 500W (Radeon R9 270X). Power connectors: None vs 2x 6-pin. Card length: 145mm vs 241mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 60°C vs 80 C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1630 | Radeon R9 270X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-58% | 180W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-40% | 500W |
| Power Connector | None | 2x 6-pin |
| Length | 145mm | 241mm |
| Height | 111mm | 109mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 60°C-25% | 80 C |
| Perf/Watt | 66.6+146% | 27.1 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1630 launched at $150 MSRP and currently averages $90, while the Radeon R9 270X launched at $199 and now averages $40. The Radeon R9 270X costs 55.6% less ($50 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 55.5 (GeForce GTX 1630) vs 121.8 (Radeon R9 270X) — the Radeon R9 270X offers 119.5% better value. The GeForce GTX 1630 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2013).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1630 | Radeon R9 270X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150-25% | $199 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $90 | $40-56% |
| Performance per Dollar | 55.5 | 121.8+119% |
| Codename | TU117 | Curacao |
| Release | June 28 2022 | October 8 2013 |
| Ranking | #444 | #448 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 1630 and Radeon R9 270X
