AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM vs AMD Radeon R9 M280X
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM and AMD Radeon R9 M280X 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 month(s) later
- 3.7x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3032 vs 814
- Around 86% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 460 vs 247
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 5 May 2015 vs 5 February 2015 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3032 vs 814 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 460 vs 247 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 M280X
- Around 11% higher texture fill rate: 56 GTexel / s vs 50.4 GTexel / s
- Around 17% higher pipelines: 896 vs 768
- Around 11% better floating-point performance: 1,792 gflops vs 1,613 gflops
- 2.9x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 41708 vs 14269
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3713 vs 3667
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3340
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3713 vs 3667
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3340
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 56 GTexel / s vs 50.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 896 vs 768 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,792 gflops vs 1,613 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 41708 vs 14269 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3713 vs 3667 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3340 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3713 vs 3667 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3340 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 M280X
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM | AMD Radeon R9 M280X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3032 | 814 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 460 | 247 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14269 | 41708 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 39.283 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 815.354 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.437 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 63.718 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 171.258 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4468 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3667 | 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4468 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3667 | 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 | 3358 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM | AMD Radeon R9 M280X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Code name | Tobago | Saturn |
| Launch date | 5 May 2015 | 5 February 2015 |
| Place in performance rating | 663 | 664 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 1,613 gflops | 1,792 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 768 | 896 |
| Texture fill rate | 50.4 GTexel / s | 56 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 85 Watt | |
| Transistor count | 2,080 million | 2,080 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 165 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
| Bus support | Not Listed | |
| Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | Not Listed | |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 104.0 GB / s | 88 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 6500 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | Not Listed |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| DualGraphics | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Switchable graphics | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM with others
AMDRadeon R9 360 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce PCX 5900
AMDRadeon R9 360 OEM vs
AMDRadeon HD 7950 Mac Edition
AMDRadeon R9 360 OEM vs
AMDRadeon R7 250X
AMDRadeon R9 360 OEM vs
AMDRadeon R9 M280X
AMDRadeon R9 360 OEM vs
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580
AMDRadeon R9 360 OEM vs
IntelUHD Graphics 730
