Radeon R7 M360 vs FirePro W9000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W9000 with Radeon R7 M360, including specs and performance data.

FirePro W9000
2012
6 GB GDDR5, 350 Watt
14.71
+951%

W9000 outperforms R7 M360 by a whopping 951% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking3901033
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.40no data
Power efficiency4.12no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameTahitiMeso
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date14 June 2012 (13 years ago)5 May 2015 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,999 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2048384
Compute unitsno data6
Core clock speed975 MHz1100 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1125 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)350 Wattno data
Texture fill rate124.827.00
Floating-point processing power3.994 TFLOPS0.864 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs12824
L1 Cache512 KB96 KB
L2 Cache768 KB128 KB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount6 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1375 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth264 GB/s14.4 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x SDINo outputs
Eyefinity-+
StereoOutput3D+-
Dual-link DVI support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
PowerTune-+
DualGraphics-+
ZeroCore-+
Switchable graphics-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_1)DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.16.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.2Not Listed
Vulkan1.2.131+
Mantle-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

FirePro W9000 14.71
+951%
R7 M360 1.40

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

FirePro W9000 6157
+954%
Samples: 15
R7 M360 584
Samples: 310

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD120−130
+900%
12
−900%

Cost per frame, $

1080p33.33no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 44
+0%
44
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5
+0%
5
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+0%
7
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how FirePro W9000 and R7 M360 compete in popular games:

  • FirePro W9000 is 900% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 50 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.71 1.40
Recency 14 June 2012 5 May 2015
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 4 GB

FirePro W9000 has a 950.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R7 M360, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years.

The FirePro W9000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M360 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro W9000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R7 M360 is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro W9000
FirePro W9000
AMD Radeon R7 M360
Radeon R7 M360

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 5 votes

Rate FirePro W9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 219 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M360 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro W9000 or Radeon R7 M360, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.