OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v1.0: technical specifications plus authentic consumer ratings, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v1.0

GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£20VRAM:2 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):65 W

GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB Review: Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB
4.3/10

Overall score

Score
4.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the graphics card's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best graphics cards on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components

90%

3.9

Technical score

10%

8.3

User score

â–¼Worse than 94% of graphics cards
6.0

Value for money

Value for money
6.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

4.3

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–¼Worse than 91%
3.9

Technical score

Technical score
3.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components

44%

2.9

Performance

24%

1.6

Memory

12%

7.7

Power & Cooling

11%

6.0

Platform & Features

5%

8.9

Design

4%

4.9

Connectivity & Media

â–¼Worse than 95%
8.3

User score

User score
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 67% of models
Score components

70%

8.2

User ratings

30%

8.6

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
â–²Better than 67%
  • gigabyte-geforce-gt-630-2gb
  • gigabyte-geforce-gt-630-2gb
  • gigabyte-geforce-gt-630-2gb
gigabyte-geforce-gt-630-2gb
gigabyte-geforce-gt-630-2gb
gigabyte-geforce-gt-630-2gb
Best prices
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Graphics cards model ranking

Ranked #1189 of 2,195 models in Graphics cards (Overall score)

Technical Specifications of graphics card GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB

Technical score
Technical score
3.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components:

44%

2.9

Performance

24%

1.6

Memory

12%

7.7

Power & Cooling

11%

6.0

Platform & Features

5%

8.9

Design

4%

4.9

Connectivity & Media

3.9
User score
User score
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 67% of models
Score components

70%

8.2

User ratings

30%

8.6

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
8.3
Popularity
Popularity
8.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you prefer a graphics card that has already been chosen and reviewed by many other users.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 80% of models
Popularity:
GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB has a popularity score of 8.6 points, which is higher than that of 79.9% of products in this category.
8.6
Value for money
Value for money
6.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components:

70%

4.3

Overall score

30%

10

Price

6.0
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
?
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.2% of graphics cards and equal to 16.8% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
686 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 686 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 99.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
373 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 373 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 99.6% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
0.31 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 0.31 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 99.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
2 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 2 GB of VRAM, which is less than 94.5% of graphics cards and equal to 3.8% of graphics cards.
Memory type
DDR3
GDDR version
DDR3
This graphics card uses DDR3 memory, which is older than on 99.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.7% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 69.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
25.6 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 25.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 99.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
2
This graphics card supports PCIe 2, which is older than on 98.7% of graphics cards and equal to 1.2% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 23.4% of graphics cards and equal to 76.6% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.2
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.2, which is older than on 95.1% of graphics cards and equal to 3.7% of graphics cards.
vendor-name or prompt-tail contamination removed; Vulkan version unresolved.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 1.9% of graphics cards and equal to 98.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
2
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 2 displays, which is fewer than 97.8% of graphics cards and equal to 2.1% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
2560x1600
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 2560x1600, which is lower than that of 97.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
0
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 0 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 97.3% of graphics cards and equal to 2.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
?
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
65 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 65 W, which is lower than that of 95.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
65 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 65 W under peak load, which is lower than 95.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
350 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 350 W PSU, which is lower than that of 93.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.2% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
65 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 65 W, which is lower than that of 95.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
65 W
Show more
Size
186x 130x 36 mm
Length
186 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >350 mm
This graphics card is 186 mm long, which is shorter than 92.5% of graphics cards.
Height
111 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 111 mm tall, which is shorter than 83.5% of graphics cards and equal in height to 5.1% of graphics cards.
Slot width
1 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 1 slot/s, which is slimmer than 96.1% of graphics cards and equal in width to 3.9% of graphics cards.
Weight
?
Show more

GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 69.8% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (65 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    65 W vs 215 W
  • 46.2% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (350 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    350 W vs 650 W
  • 21.33x larger L2 cache
    This graphics card has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (512 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    512 MB vs 24 MB
  • 1.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (1 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    1 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 99 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (186 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    186 mm vs 285 mm
  • 14 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111 mm vs 125 mm
  • 71.1% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (65 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    65 W vs 225 W
  • 26.5x cheaper
    GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB is cheaper than the average graphics card (£20 vs £530).
    £20 vs £530
  • 26.5x cheaper
    GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB is cheaper than the average graphics card (£20 vs £530).
    £20 vs £530
  • 4% higher user score
    User score
    8.3/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
    When it matters
    When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB
    the average graphics card
    GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB has a higher user score than the average graphics card (8.32 vs 8.000).
    8.32 vs 8
  • Better FP64 ratio
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:24 vs 1:64).
    1:24 vs 1:64
  • 21.33x larger L2 cache
    This graphics card has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (512 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    512 MB vs 24 MB
  • 70.5% smaller GPU die
    This graphics card has a lower GPU die size than the average graphics card (87 mm² vs 295 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 295 mm².
    87 mm² vs 295 mm²
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • 69.8% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (65 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    65 W vs 215 W
  • 46.2% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (350 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    350 W vs 650 W
  • 71.1% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (65 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    65 W vs 225 W
  • 70.5% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (65 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    65 W vs 220 W
  • 7 °C lower idle temperature
    This graphics card has a lower idle temperature than the average graphics card (30 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    30 °C vs 37 °C
  • 1.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (1 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    1 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 99 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (186 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    186 mm vs 285 mm
  • 14 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111 mm vs 125 mm
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    128 bit vs 256 bit
  • 38 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (2 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    2 vs 40
  • 8x larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (40 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    40 nm vs 5 nm
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • 57.8% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (810 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    810 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 168 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (16 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    16 vs 184
  • 19.5% worse value for money
    GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.02 vs 7.2).
    6.02 vs 7.2
  • 38 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (2 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    2 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 57.8% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (810 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    810 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 168 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (16 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    16 vs 184
  • 96.6% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (13 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    13 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 98% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (3.2 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    3.24 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 60 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (4 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    4 vs 64
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 98.6% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (0.3 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    0.31 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 97% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (686 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    686 points vs 22,653 points
  • 96.9% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (373 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
    373 points vs 12,074 points
  • 99% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (0.3 TFLOPS vs 29.7 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.725 TFLOPS.
    0.31 TFLOPS vs 29.725 TFLOPS
  • 98.7% lower compute throughput
    This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (0.3 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
    0.31 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
  • 93.8% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.03 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 4,256 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (96 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    96 vs 4,352
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    128 bit vs 256 bit
  • 94.3% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (25.6 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    25.6 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 91.6% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (1600 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 MHz.
    1,600 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 48.6% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (900 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 MHz.
    900 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 50% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (64 vs 128). The average graphics card has 128 L1 cache.
    64 vs 128
  • Older GDDR version
    This graphics card uses an older GDDR version than the average graphics card (DDR3 vs GDDR6).
    DDR3 vs GDDR6
  • 8x larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (40 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    40 nm vs 5 nm
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (2 vs 4).
    2.0 vs 4.0
  • 11 older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2012 vs 2023).
    May 2012
    2,012 vs 2,023
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4).
    vendor-name or prompt-tail contamination removed; Vulkan version unresolved.
    1.2 vs 1.4
  • Worse SAM support
    This graphics card offers worse SAM support than the average graphics card (no vs yes).
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (5.1 vs 6.8).
    5.1 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • 97.4% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (585 million vs 22900 million). The average graphics card has 22900 million transistors.
    585 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older encoder generation
    This graphics card uses an older encoder generation than the average graphics card (7 vs 8). The average graphics card uses encoder generation 8.
    7 vs 8
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (1 vs 3.1).
    1.0 vs 3.1
  • 3 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (0 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    0 vs 3
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 2 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (2 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    2 vs 4
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1).
    1.4a vs 2.1
  • No VRR support
    This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
    1.2 vs 1.4a
  • Narrower encode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware encode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 2.3).
    1.2 vs 2.3
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (2560x1600 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    2560x1600 vs 7680x4320
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (1 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    1 vs 6
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • 13 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (80 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    80 °C vs 67 °C
  • 7 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (102 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    102 °C vs 95 °C
  • 28 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (28 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    28 dB vs 0 dB
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

H
hardware.info
09/09/2014
Summary of the review
Beste HTPC-basis voor de toekomst: videokwaliteit van courante GPU's getest
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
Reviews last updated: June 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB

  • Inexpensive and offers good value for money at its original price point.
  • Quiet operation with a fan that remains tolerable even under load.
  • Low power consumption; does not require additional power connectors from the PSU.
  • Compact single-slot design (though the cooling shroud may block the adjacent slot).
  • Reliable for basic multimedia tasks, HTPCs, and handling dual-monitor setups.
  • Easy installation and setup, particularly with legacy OS like Windows 7.
  • Sufficient for light or older gaming titles like Sims 3, Diablo 3, and basic esports.

What we don't like about GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB

  • Obsolete by modern standards and struggles to run newer AAA games even on minimum settings.
  • No support for advanced modern features like NVENC encoding, DLSS, or Ray Tracing.
  • Limited feature level (11_0) for DirectX 12, causing compatibility issues with newer titles.
  • Possible compatibility issues with certain older motherboards (e.g., reports of whining sounds or RAM detection issues).
  • Display driver controls for color calibration (contrast/brightness) can be unintuitive or inconsistent.
  • Performance is lower than most modern integrated graphics solutions.
  • Reported software limitations under Linux, specifically regarding 3D support and older drivers.

Verdict

The Gigabyte GeForce GT 630 2GB is an entry-level graphics card featuring a Fermi-based GF108 GPU with 96 CUDA cores, an 810 MHz core clock, and a 1620 MHz shader clock. It is equipped with 2GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit interface, providing a 25.6 GB/s bandwidth, and includes a custom 80mm fan for cooling. Key pros include its low power consumption with no external power connector required, compatibility with a wide range of legacy systems, and reliable performance for high-definition video playback and basic multimedia tasks. However, it faces notable cons, such as its outdated 40nm architecture and limited performance in modern gaming, struggling with newer titles even at low settings.

Compare GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of GIGABYTE GeForce GT 630 2GB and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found