AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM vs AMD Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM and AMD Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- Around 25% higher core clock speed: 1000 MHz vs 800 MHz
- 2.4x lower typical power consumption: 85 Watt vs 200 Watt
- Around 30% higher memory clock speed: 6500 MHz vs 5000 MHz
Launch date | 5 May 2015 vs 7 March 2013 |
Core clock speed | 1000 MHz vs 800 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 85 Watt vs 200 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 6500 MHz vs 5000 MHz |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition
- Around 78% higher texture fill rate: 89.6 GTexel / s vs 50.4 GTexel / s
- 2.3x more pipelines: 1792 vs 768
- Around 78% better floating-point performance: 2,867 gflops vs 1,613 gflops
- Around 50% higher maximum memory size: 3 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 73% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 67.802 vs 39.283
- Around 51% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1230.769 vs 815.354
- Around 28% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 81.68 vs 63.718
- 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 370.179 vs 171.258
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 89.6 GTexel / s vs 50.4 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1792 vs 768 |
Floating-point performance | 2,867 gflops vs 1,613 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 3 GB vs 2 GB |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.802 vs 39.283 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1230.769 vs 815.354 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 81.68 vs 63.718 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 370.179 vs 171.258 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM | AMD Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3032 | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 460 | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 14269 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 39.283 | 67.802 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 815.354 | 1230.769 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.437 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 63.718 | 81.68 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 171.258 | 370.179 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4468 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3667 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4468 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3667 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM | AMD Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | Tobago | Tahiti |
Launch date | 5 May 2015 | 7 March 2013 |
Place in performance rating | 663 | 666 |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Launch price (MSRP) | $449 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 1000 MHz | 800 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 1,613 gflops | 2,867 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 768 | 1792 |
Texture fill rate | 50.4 GTexel / s | 89.6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 85 Watt | 200 Watt |
Transistor count | 2,080 million | 4,313 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 165 mm | 279 mm |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 2x 6-pin |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (11_1) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 3 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 104.0 GB / s | 240.0 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 6500 MHz | 5000 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |