ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT vs R7 M360

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 M360 with Radeon HD 2600 XT, including specs and performance data.

R7 M360
2015
4 GB DDR3
1.49
+104%

R7 M360 outperforms ATI HD 2600 XT by a whopping 104% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9791159
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiencyno data1.13
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameMesoRV630
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)28 June 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores384120
Compute units6no data
Core clock speed1100 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speed1125 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,550 million390 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data45 Watt
Texture fill rate27.006.400
Floating-point processing power0.864 TFLOPS0.192 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs248

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 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB256 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s22.4 GB/s
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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video
Eyefinity+-

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 compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1210.0 (10_0)
Shader Model6.04.0
OpenGL4.43.3
OpenCLNot ListedN/A
Vulkan+N/A
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 M360 1.49
+104%
ATI HD 2600 XT 0.73

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 M360 573
+103%
ATI HD 2600 XT 282

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 HD11
+120%
5−6
−120%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data39.80

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hitman 3 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+106%
16−18
−106%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hitman 3 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
+125%
8−9
−125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+106%
16−18
−106%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hitman 3 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+106%
16−18
−106%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

This is how R7 M360 and ATI HD 2600 XT compete in popular games:

  • R7 M360 is 120% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.49 0.73
Recency 5 May 2015 28 June 2007
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm

R7 M360 has a 104.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R7 M360 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 2600 XT in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 M360 is a notebook card while Radeon HD 2600 XT is a desktop one.


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 M360
Radeon R7 M360
ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT
Radeon HD 2600 XT

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.


3.2 196 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 90 votes

Rate Radeon HD 2600 XT 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.