GeForce GTX 680M SLI vs Radeon R7 360

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 360 with GeForce GTX 680M SLI, including specs and performance data.

R7 360
2015
2 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
7.02

GTX 680M SLI outperforms R7 360 by a whopping 102% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking526340
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.82no data
Power efficiency5.59no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameTobagoN13E-GTX
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (9 years ago)4 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores7682688
Core clock speedno data720 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,080 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Wattno data
Texture fill rate50.40no data
Floating-point processing power1.613 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs48no data

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length165 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno data
SLI options-+
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2x 4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit2x 256 Bit
Memory clock speed6000 MHz3600 MHz
Memory bandwidth112 GB/sno data
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortno data
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data
Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan+-
Mantle+-
CUDA-+

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:

900p65−70
−105%
133
+105%
Full HD45−50
−118%
98
+118%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.42no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 229
+0%
229
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

This is how R7 360 and GTX 680M SLI compete in popular games:

  • GTX 680M SLI is 105% faster in 900p
  • GTX 680M SLI is 118% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.02 14.18
Recency 18 June 2015 4 June 2012

R7 360 has an age advantage of 3 years.

GTX 680M SLI, on the other hand, has a 102% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GTX 680M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 360 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 360 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 680M SLI 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 Radeon R7 360
Radeon R7 360
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M SLI
GeForce GTX 680M SLI

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.


3.8 680 votes

Rate Radeon R7 360 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 3 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 360 or GeForce GTX 680M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.