AMD Radeon R7 360 versus AMD Radeon R7 260X
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 360 and AMD Radeon R7 260X pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire, Technologies. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: 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.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 360
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 8 mois plus tard
- Environ 15% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 100 Watt versus 115 Watt
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 819.203 versus 804.436
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4799 versus 3845
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 4147 versus 3485
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4799 versus 3845
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 4147 versus 3485
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 18 June 2015 versus 8 October 2013 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt versus 115 Watt |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 819.203 versus 804.436 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4799 versus 3845 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 4147 versus 3485 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4799 versus 3845 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 4147 versus 3485 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 260X
- Environ 22% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 61.6 GTexel / s versus 50.4 GTexel / s
- Environ 17% de pipelines plus haut: 896 versus 768
- Environ 22% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,971 gflops versus 1,613 gflops
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3189 versus 3114
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 522 versus 512
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 43.745 versus 38.068
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.673 versus 3.386
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 64.088 versus 58.285
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 221.539 versus 188.858
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1481 versus 1402
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 61.6 GTexel / s versus 50.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 896 versus 768 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,971 gflops versus 1,613 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3189 versus 3114 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 522 versus 512 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 43.745 versus 38.068 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.673 versus 3.386 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 64.088 versus 58.285 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 221.539 versus 188.858 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3356 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1481 versus 1402 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 360
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 260X
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| 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 |
|
|
| Nom | AMD Radeon R7 360 | AMD Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3114 | 3189 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 512 | 522 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 16433 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 38.068 | 43.745 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 819.203 | 804.436 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.386 | 3.673 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 58.285 | 64.088 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 188.858 | 221.539 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4799 | 3845 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 4147 | 3485 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4799 | 3845 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 4147 | 3485 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1402 | 1481 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 360 | AMD Radeon R7 260X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Nom de code | Tobago | Bonaire |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R7 300 Series | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series |
| Date de sortie | 18 June 2015 | 8 October 2013 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $109 | $139 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 645 | 648 |
| Prix maintenant | $146.65 | $239 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 29.24 | 17.15 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1000 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,613 gflops | 1,971 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 768 | 896 |
| Stream Processors | 768 | 896 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 50.4 GTexel / s | 61.6 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | 115 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 2,080 million | 2,080 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Nombre d’écrans Eyefinity | 6 | |
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Bridgeless CrossFire | ||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 165 mm | 170 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1 x 6-pin | 1 x 6-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 112 GB/s | 104 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1050 MHz | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R7 360 avec des autres
AMDRadeon R7 360 vs
ATIMobility Radeon X2300
AMDRadeon R7 360 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 3430
AMDRadeon R7 360 vs
AMDRadeon R7 260X
AMDRadeon R7 360 vs
AMDFirePro M5100
AMDRadeon R7 360 vs
AMDFirePro W5100
AMDRadeon R7 360 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
