Radeon R7 M360 vs R9 290

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 290 with Radeon R7 M360, including specs and performance data.

R9 290
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 275 Watt
21.01
+1301%

R9 290 outperforms R7 M360 by a whopping 1301% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking273986
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.06no data
Power efficiency5.26no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameHawaiiMeso
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 November 2013 (11 years ago)5 May 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 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 cores2560384
Compute unitsno data6
Core clock speed947 MHz1100 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1125 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Wattno data
Texture fill rate151.527.00
Floating-point processing power4.849 TFLOPS0.864 TFLOPS
ROPs648
TMUs16024

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 supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotno 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 amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth320.0 GB/s14.4 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity-+
HDMI+-

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 compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.36.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL2.0Not Listed
Vulkan1.2.131+
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.

R9 290 21.01
+1301%
R7 M360 1.50

  • Other tests
    • Passmark
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

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.

R9 290 8093
+1300%
R7 M360 578

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.

R9 290 11860
+935%
R7 M360 1146

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 HD160−170
+1233%
12
−1233%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.49no data

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 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 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+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%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 5
+0%
5
+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 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how R9 290 and R7 M360 compete in popular games:

  • R9 290 is 1233% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 49 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 21.01 1.50
Recency 5 November 2013 5 May 2015

R9 290 has a 1300.7% higher aggregate performance score.

R7 M360, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

The Radeon R9 290 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M360 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 290 is a desktop 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 Radeon R9 290
Radeon R9 290
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.


4.1
579 votes

Rate Radeon R9 290 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 290 or Radeon R7 M360, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.