Radeon R7 240 vs R7 360

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 360 and Radeon R7 240, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 360
2015
2 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
8.05
+245%

R7 360 outperforms R7 240 by a whopping 245% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking515844
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.090.16
Power efficiency5.565.37
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameTobagoOland
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferencereference
Release date18 June 2015 (9 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 $69

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R7 360 has 2456% better value for money than R7 240.

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 cores768320
Boost clock speed1000 MHz780 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate50.4014.00
Floating-point processing power1.613 TFLOPS0.448 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs4820

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
Length165 mm168 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinN/A
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 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed6000 MHz1150 MHz
Memory bandwidth112 GB/s72 GB/s

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 DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
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++

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan+-
Mantle+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R7 360 8.05
+245%
R7 240 2.33

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.

R7 360 3105
+246%
R7 240 898

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R7 360 4110
+237%
R7 240 1220

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.05 2.33
Recency 18 June 2015 8 October 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 50 Watt

R7 360 has a 245.5% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

R7 240, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 360 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 240 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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
AMD Radeon R7 240
Radeon R7 240

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.9 658 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 1166 votes

Rate Radeon R7 240 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.