GeForce GTX 1630VSRadeon RX 6400
Performance, specifications and real-world gaming comparison
♜ WINNERRadeon RX 6400+3%Better gaming performance
NVIDIA
GTX 1630
VSWINNERRX 64003%Better gaming performance
AMD
RX 6400
Performance3233
Efficiency100100
Price / performance100100
Data confidence6969
Fixed-scale H2H model. Missing metrics are omitted instead of estimated from the overall score.
GeForce GTX 1630 vs Radeon RX 6400: key takeaway
The comparison of GTX 1630 and RX 6400 shows a 3% advantage for RX 6400 in gaming performance, while GTX 1630 may still be stronger in value for money. Use the sections below to check whether that lead comes from real FPS, specifications, efficiency, price or platform features.
SUMMARY PROFILE
Verified-metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIA
AMDPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3233
100100
100100
6060
COMPARISON RESULT
The devices received the same overall score
GTX 1630 leads in combined game performance. GTX 1630 offers the better price per frame, while the final choice depends on the required features, memory, and games.
Performance is nearly identical
GTX 1630 costs less
CATALOG POSITION
Full ranking →Graphics card ranking
Positions 56–61of 61
COMPARISON VERDICT
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GTX 1630
0 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
GeForce GTX 1630
100/100 · Price $119The choice is based on the price-to-performance index and launch price.
OVERALL SCORE
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
The Summary score section compares GTX 1630 and RX 6400 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
32
33Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
29
30Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
27
28Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100
100
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
58
58
FULL COMPARISON
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
The Specifications section compares GTX 1630 and RX 6400 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
DisplayPort1x DisplayPort 1.4a1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI1x HDMI 2.01x HDMI 2.1
Device classDesktopDesktop
Max monitors32
Max resolution7680 × 43207680 × 4320
USB Type-CNoNo
DirectX12.112.2
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
TFLOPS1.8283.565Better
Power consumption75 W53 WBetter
Memory typeGDDR6GDDR6
Power connectorNoneNone
Release date20222022
ArchitectureTuringRDNA 2.0
ThicknessSingle-slotSingle-slot
Upscaling—FSR
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5OpenCL 2.2
Clock speed1740 - 1785 MHz1923 - 2321 MHzBetter
Base clock1740 MHz1923 MHzBetter
Boost clock1785 MHz2321 MHzBetter
VRAM4 GB GDDR64 GB GDDR6
Memory frequency12 GHz16 GHzBetter
Memory bus64 bit64 bit
Memory bandwidth96 GB/s128 GB/sBetter
InterfacePCIe 3x8PCIe 4x4
Power consumption75 W53 WBetter
Process node12 nm6 nmBetter
Recommended PSU250 W250 W
Length145 mmVaries by board
Launch price$119Better$159
Shader units / cores512768Better
Die size200 mm²107 mm²Better
Memory cacheL1 64 KB, L2 1 MBL1 128 KB, L2 1 MB
Transistor count4700 million5400 millionBetter
GAME TEST BENCH
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GTX 1630 and RX 6400 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GTX 1630RX 6400
Verified H2HCommunity VerifiedEstimatedPredicted
Black Myth: Wukong
1080p High
19 FPSEstimated 64%
20 FPSEstimated 64%
1080p Ultra
16 FPSEstimated 64%
17 FPSEstimated 64%
1440p Ultra
9 FPSEstimated 58%
9 FPSEstimated 58%
4K Ultra
5 FPSEstimated 55%
5 FPSEstimated 55%
Black Myth: Wukong19Estimated 64%20Estimated 64%16Estimated 64%17Estimated 64%9Estimated 58%9Estimated 58%5Estimated 55%5Estimated 55%
Call of Duty: Warzone19Estimated 64%20Estimated 64%16Estimated 64%17Estimated 64%9Estimated 58%9Estimated 58%5Estimated 55%5Estimated 55%
Counter-Strike 2162Estimated 72%168Estimated 72%114Estimated 72%118Estimated 72%62Estimated 66%63Estimated 66%22Estimated 62%23Estimated 62%
Cyberpunk 2077105Estimated 72%109Estimated 72%90Estimated 72%93Estimated 72%45Estimated 66%46Estimated 66%15Estimated 62%15Estimated 62%
Forza Horizon 5132Estimated 78%137Estimated 78%86Estimated 72%88Estimated 72%55Estimated 66%57Estimated 66%32Estimated 62%33Estimated 62%
God of War Ragnarök19Estimated 64%20Estimated 64%16Estimated 64%17Estimated 64%9Estimated 58%9Estimated 58%5Estimated 55%5Estimated 55%
Hogwarts Legacy86Estimated 72%89Estimated 72%72Estimated 72%74Estimated 72%40Estimated 66%41Estimated 66%15Estimated 62%16Estimated 62%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 202419Estimated 64%20Estimated 64%16Estimated 64%17Estimated 64%9Estimated 58%9Estimated 58%5Estimated 55%5Estimated 55%
Monster Hunter Wilds19Estimated 64%20Estimated 64%16Estimated 64%17Estimated 64%9Estimated 58%9Estimated 58%5Estimated 55%5Estimated 55%
Starfield19Estimated 64%20Estimated 64%16Estimated 64%17Estimated 64%9Estimated 58%9Estimated 58%5Estimated 55%5Estimated 55%
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
The Benchmarks section compares GTX 1630 and RX 6400 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 10032333%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100404410%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10040412%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10060600%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001001000%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
The Detailed comparison section compares GTX 1630 and RX 6400 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 10045450%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10043442%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10040412%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10048480%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10041410%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
The Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling section compares GTX 1630 and RX 6400 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
DirectX12.112.2
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
Upscaling—FSR
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5OpenCL 2.2
Architecture and release
The Architecture and release section compares GTX 1630 and RX 6400 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
ArchitectureTuringRDNA 2.0
Process node12 nm6 nmBetter
Release date20222022
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
The Core layout and clocks section compares GTX 1630 and RX 6400 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
Transistor count4700 million5400 millionBetter
Die size200 mm²107 mm²Better
Shader units / cores512768Better
Base clock1740 MHz1923 MHzBetter
Boost clock1785 MHz2321 MHzBetter
Board size, power and compatibility
The Form factor and compatibility section compares GTX 1630 and RX 6400 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
InterfacePCIe 3x8PCIe 4x4
Length145 mmVaries by board
ThicknessSingle-slotSingle-slot
Recommended PSU250 W250 W
Power connectorNoneNone
Display outputs and limits
The Display outputs section compares GTX 1630 and RX 6400 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
HDMI1x HDMI 2.01x HDMI 2.1
DisplayPort1x DisplayPort 1.4a1x DisplayPort 1.4a
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitors32
Max resolution7680 × 43207680 × 4320
Memory and compute throughput
The VRAM capacity and bandwidth section compares GTX 1630 and RX 6400 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
VRAM4 GB GDDR64 GB GDDR6
Memory typeGDDR6GDDR6
Memory bus64 bit64 bit
TFLOPS1.8283.565Better
HEAD TO HEAD · DISCOVER
6Other comparisons
Arc A310IntelReviews and questions
AI EXPLAIN · HEAD TO HEAD
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
REAL CONFIGURATIONS
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
♢Moderator reviewed☆Helpful to the community🏅Expert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GTX 1630 or RX 6400?+
GTX 1630 has the higher overall gaming score, while GTX 1630 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GTX 1630 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GTX 1630 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GTX 1630 offers more overall performance, while GTX 1630 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GTX 1630 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GTX 1630 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GTX 1630 leads in combined 1440p performance. GTX 1630 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GTX 1630 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
RX 6400 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
RX 6400 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GTX 1630 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.