AMD FirePro W2100 vs AMD Radeon R7 M360 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Radeon R7 M360 and the AMD FirePro W2100, and in both cases the R7 M360 comes out ahead. The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the R7 M360 scoring 4638 against the FirePro W2100's 4093, a 13.3% advantage. The margin widens in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the R7 M360 reaches 5223 while the FirePro W2100 manages 4497, a 16.1% lead for the Radeon.

These are not marginal victories. A 13.3% delta in OpenCL and a 16.1% delta in Vulkan indicate a consistent performance tier separation rather than a close contest. The R7 M360 wins both recorded tests, giving it a 2-0 record in the head-to-head data. The Vulkan result is particularly telling, as it suggests the R7 M360's architectural advantages translate into real-world graphics API workloads, not just compute-oriented OpenCL tasks.

When placed against their respective peer groups, the gap between these two cards becomes clearer. The R7 M360 holds an average benchmark score of 4931, placing it in the 29th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 M265 with an average score of 4929 (a 0% delta), the AMD FirePro W5130M at 4904 (0.6% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 at 4893 (0.8% ahead). The FirePro W2100, by contrast, averages 4295 and sits in the 25th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M at 4241 (1.3% behind the FirePro) and the AMD Radeon Vega 3 at 4268 (0.6% behind). The R7 M360's average score is roughly 14.8% higher than the FirePro W2100's, a substantial margin that aligns with the head-to-head deltas.

The pattern is consistent: the R7 M360 wins every recorded benchmark against the FirePro W2100, and its average score places it in a higher competitive bracket. The FirePro W2100, while not a weak performer in its own right, sits clearly below the R7 M360 in the database's performance hierarchy.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture. The R7 M360 is built on GCN 3.0 with the Meso chip, while the FirePro W2100 uses GCN 1.0 with the Oland chip. This is a significant generational leap: GCN 3.0 brought architectural refinements over the original GCN design, which is reflected in the performance gap observed in the benchmarks.

Both cards are manufactured on TSMC's 28 nm process node, and both come from AMD. The transistor counts differ notably: the R7 M360 packs 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 12.4 million per square millimeter. The FirePro W2100 has 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, with a density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The R7 M360's larger die and higher transistor count are consistent with its more advanced architecture and higher performance.

Clock speeds show a clear divergence. The R7 M360 runs at a 1100 MHz base clock and 1125 MHz boost, while the FirePro W2100 operates at 630 MHz base and 680 MHz boost. The R7 M360's clocks are roughly 75% higher at base and 65% higher at boost, which contributes substantially to its compute advantage. Memory clocks are identical at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), but the memory subsystems differ in bus width and bandwidth.

The R7 M360 features 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. The FirePro W2100 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The R7 M360's extra shading units and TMUs, combined with higher clocks, produce significantly higher theoretical rates: 9.000 GPixel/s pixel rate and 27.00 GTexel/s texture rate versus the FirePro W2100's 5.440 GPixel/s and 13.60 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute rating tells the same story: 864.0 GFLOPS for the R7 M360 versus 435.2 GFLOPS for the FirePro W2100, exactly double. The R7 M360 also supports FP16 at 864.0 GFLOPS (1:1), while the FirePro W2100 has no recorded FP16 capability.

The memory configurations differ in an interesting way. Both have 2 GB of DDR3, but the R7 M360 uses a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro W2100 uses a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W2100 actually has double the memory bandwidth, yet it still loses in every benchmark. This suggests the R7 M360's architectural and clock advantages more than compensate for its narrower memory bus.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon R7 M360 wins both recorded tests, so there is no benchmark category where the FirePro W2100 comes out ahead. The R7 M360's advantages are most pronounced in Vulkan, where its 16.1% lead exceeds its 13.3% OpenCL advantage. This suggests the newer GCN 3.0 architecture handles modern graphics APIs more efficiently, making the R7 M360 the stronger choice for Vulkan-based workloads.

The FirePro W2100 does have one notable specification advantage: memory bandwidth. Its 128-bit bus provides 28.80 GB/s, double the R7 M360's 14.40 GB/s. In theory, this could benefit bandwidth-sensitive workloads, but the recorded benchmarks do not show any such benefit materializing. The R7 M360 wins regardless of the API tested.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput, the R7 M360's 864.0 GFLOPS FP32 rating is exactly twice the FirePro W2100's 435.2 GFLOPS. The R7 M360 also offers FP16 support at the same rate, which could matter for applications that leverage half-precision math. The FirePro W2100 has no recorded FP16 capability.

The FirePro W2100 does bring workstation-oriented features that the R7 M360 lacks. It has two DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the R7 M360 has no recorded display outputs. The FirePro W2100 also has a defined power envelope: 26 W TDP, single-slot design, no power connectors, and a suggested 200 W PSU. The R7 M360 has no recorded TDP, slot width, or power specifications. For compact or low-power systems, the FirePro W2100's documented physical and power profile could be a deciding factor despite its lower performance.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The R7 M360 uses the Meso chip with GCN 3.0 architecture, while the FirePro W2100 uses the Oland chip with GCN 1.0. Both are 28 nm TSMC parts, but the R7 M360 has 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, versus 950 million on 77 mm² for the FirePro W2100. Transistor density is nearly identical (12.4M vs 12.3M per mm²), but the R7 M360's larger die houses more execution resources.

Clock speeds favor the R7 M360: 1100 MHz base and 1125 MHz boost versus 630 MHz base and 680 MHz boost for the FirePro W2100. Memory clocks are the same at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), but the memory bus differs: 64-bit for the R7 M360 versus 128-bit for the FirePro W2100. This yields bandwidth of 14.40 GB/s for the R7 M360 and 28.80 GB/s for the FirePro W2100.

The R7 M360 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, while the FirePro W2100 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel rates are 9.000 GPixel/s versus 5.440 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 27.00 GTexel/s versus 13.60 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 864.0 GFLOPS versus 435.2 GFLOPS, with the R7 M360 also offering FP16 at 864.0 GFLOPS (1:1) while the FirePro W2100 has none.

The FirePro W2100 has documented power and physical specs: 26 W TDP, single-slot width, no power connectors, 200 W suggested PSU, and dimensions of 168 mm (6.6 inches) in length and 69 mm (2.7 inches) in height. The R7 M360 has no recorded values for any of these fields. The FirePro W2100 also lists two DisplayPort 1.2 outputs; the R7 M360 has no recorded display outputs.

API support differs slightly in DirectX: the R7 M360 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the FirePro W2100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. The R7 M360's DirectX 12 feature level is higher, which may affect compatibility with certain modern titles.

Release dates also differ: the R7 M360 launched on 2015-05-04, while the FirePro W2100 launched on 2014-08-11. Both are end-of-life products. The R7 M360's predecessor is listed as Solar System and its successor as Polaris Mobile; the FirePro W2100's predecessor is FirePro Terascale and its successor is Radeon Pro Polaris.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M360 averages 4931, while the AMD FirePro W2100 averages 4295. The R7 M360's average is about 14.8% higher.

Q: How does the R7 M360 perform in Vulkan compared to the FirePro W2100?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the R7 M360 scores 5223 versus the FirePro W2100's 4497, giving the R7 M360 a 16.1% advantage.

Q: Does the FirePro W2100 have any specification advantage over the R7 M360?

A: Yes, the FirePro W2100 has a 128-bit memory bus providing 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, double the R7 M360's 64-bit bus at 14.40 GB/s. The FirePro W2100 also has documented display outputs (2x DisplayPort 1.2) and a 26 W TDP, while the R7 M360 has no recorded display outputs or power specifications.

Q: What are the FP32 compute ratings for these two GPUs?

A: The R7 M360 delivers 864.0 GFLOPS FP32, exactly double the FirePro W2100's 435.2 GFLOPS. The R7 M360 also supports FP16 at 864.0 GFLOPS (1:1), while the FirePro W2100 has no recorded FP16 capability.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The R7 M360's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M265 at 4929 (0% delta), followed by the AMD FirePro W5130M at 4904 (0.6% ahead) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB at 4901 (0.6% ahead). The FirePro W2100's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 at 4335 (0.9% ahead of the FirePro), with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M at 4282 (0.3% behind) and the AMD Radeon Vega 3 at 4268 (0.6% behind).

Q: What are the DirectX feature levels for each GPU?

A: The R7 M360 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the FirePro W2100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for performance: the AMD Radeon R7 M360. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, has a higher average score (4931 versus 4295), and delivers double the FP32 compute (864.0 GFLOPS versus 435.2 GFLOPS). Its newer GCN 3.0 architecture, higher clock speeds, and greater shading unit count all contribute to this result. Users seeking maximum benchmark performance should choose the R7 M360 without hesitation.

The FirePro W2100, however, is not without merit. It offers double the memory bandwidth (28.80 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s), which could theoretically benefit certain workloads, though the recorded benchmarks do not show this translating into wins. It also has documented display outputs (2x DisplayPort 1.2) and a defined power envelope: 26 W TDP, single-slot, no power connectors, and a 200 W suggested PSU. The R7 M360 has no recorded values for these fields, so the FirePro W2100 is the only one of the two with verifiable physical and power specifications.

For compact systems, low-power builds, or workstation setups requiring specific display outputs, the FirePro W2100's documented specifications make it a viable choice despite its lower performance. For anyone prioritizing raw benchmark scores, compute throughput, or modern API support (DirectX 12_0 versus 11_1), the R7 M360 is the superior option. The verdict depends on whether the user values the FirePro W2100's known physical attributes or the R7 M360's clear performance dominance.