AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM vs AMD Radeon R7 260X

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM and AMD Radeon R7 260X videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 6 month(s) later
• Around 5% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 1000 MHz
• Around 35% lower typical power consumption: 85 Watt vs 115 Watt
• Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 815.354 vs 804.436
• Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4468 vs 3845
• Around 5% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3667 vs 3485
• Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4468 vs 3845
• Around 5% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3667 vs 3485

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 260X

• Around 22% higher texture fill rate: 61.6 GTexel / s vs 50.4 GTexel / s
• Around 17% higher pipelines: 896 vs 768
• Around 22% better floating-point performance: 1,971 gflops vs 1,613 gflops
• 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• Around 5% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3183 vs 3032
• Around 13% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 521 vs 460
• Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 43.745 vs 39.283
• Around 7% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.673 vs 3.437
• Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 64.088 vs 63.718
• Around 29% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 221.539 vs 171.258
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3340
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3340

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 260X

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3032 3183
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	460 521
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	39.283 43.745
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	815.354 804.436
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.437 3.673
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	63.718 64.088
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	171.258 221.539
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4468 3845
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3667 3485
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3340 3358
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4468 3845
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3667 3485
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3340 3358

Compare specifications (specs)