AMD FirePro W4190M vs AMD Radeon R7 M360 Comparison

# AMD Radeon R7 M360 vs AMD FirePro W4190M: Mobile GPU Benchmark Analysis

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records one head-to-head comparison between these two mobile graphics processors. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R7 M360 scores 4,638 against the AMD FirePro W4190M's 4,505. This gives the R7 M360 a 3% advantage over the W4190M in this specific workload. The result is a clear win for the R7 M360, and the margin is consistent with the overall average benchmark scores of both parts.

Looking at the aggregate benchmark average across all recorded tests, the R7 M360 posts an average score of 4,931, while the W4190M records 4,505. The nearest rivals in the database for these two parts are instructive. The R7 M360 sits within 0.6% of the AMD Radeon R7 M265 (average score 4,929) and 0.6% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4,901). It is also within 0.8% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4,893). The FirePro W4190M, on the other hand, sits 0.1% above the AMD Radeon R7 M260 (4,499) and 1.2% below the Intel HD Graphics P530 (4,560). The R7 M360's closest listed competitor is the AMD Radeon RX 560 (4,569, a 1.4% gap), and the AMD Radeon R5 M230 trails slightly further at 4,577 (1.6% difference). These deltas place both parts in a tightly clustered performance tier, where small percentage shifts in benchmark output are meaningful.

Architecture Differences

The Radeon R7 M360 is built on AMD's GCN 3.0 architecture, using the Meso chip design. It is manufactured at TSMC on a 28 nm process node, with 1,550 million transistors packed into a 125 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.4 million per mm². The chip carries 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs.

The FirePro W4190M uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture, built around the Opal chip. It is produced at TSMC on a 28 nm node as well, with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, resulting in a density of 12.3 million per mm². Its shader configuration is slightly lower: 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs, identical to the R7 M360. The process node is shared, but the transistor density is slightly higher on the R7 M360, 12.4M versus 12.3M per mm².

The R7 M360 has a larger die (85 mm² vs 77 mm²) and more transistors (1,550M vs 950M). Both parts use a 64-bit memory bus, but the memory type differs: 2 GB of DDR3 at 900 MHz effective 1,800 Mbps on the R7 M360, versus 2 GB of GDDR5 at 1,000 MHz effective 4,000 Mbps on the FirePro. Memory bandwidth is 14.40 GB/s for the R7 M360 and 64.00 GB/s for the W4190M, a substantial difference in memory throughput.

Clock speeds are also distinct. The R7 M360 runs at a base of 1,100 MHz with a 1,125 MHz boost. The W4190M's base is 825 MHz, boosting to 900 MHz. Pixel rate is 9.000 GPixel/s for the R7 M360 and 7.200 GPixel/s for the FirePro. Texture rate is 27.00 GTexel/s and 21.60 GTexel/s respectively. FP32 compute is 864.0 GFLOPS for the R7 M360 and 691.2 GFLOPS for the W4190M.

The R7 M360 uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the W4190M also uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both. The R7 M360's production status is listed as end-of-life, released May 4, 2015. The W4190M was released November 11, 2015, also end-of-life. Predecessor and successor relationships differ: the R7 M360 follows the Solar System generation and was succeeded by Polaris Mobile; the W4190M follows FirePro Mobile and was succeeded by Radeon Pro Mobile.

FAQ

Q: Which part is faster in synthetic OpenCL workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M360. In the recorded Geekbench OpenCL test, the R7 M360 scores 4,638 versus 4,505 for the FirePro W4190M. That is a 3% higher score, and it also wins the head-to-head in the OpenCL test.

Q: Are these parts related?

A: Both are AMD mobile GPUs, but they belong to different families. The R7 M360 is a Gem System (R7 M300 series) part with GCN 3.0 architecture. The FirePro W4190M is from the FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) generation, built on GCN 1.0. They share no direct predecessor-successor lineage.

Q: Do they have the same memory configuration?

A: No. The R7 M360 uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, with an effective 1,800 Mbps and 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The W4190M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, effective 4,000 Mbps and 64.00 GB/s. The W4190M has over 4.4 times the bandwidth.

Q: Which has a higher pixel rate?

A: The Radeon R7 M360. Its pixel rate is 9.000 GPixel/s; the FirePro W4190M is rated at 7.200 GPixel/s. The R7 M360 also has the higher texture rate, 27.00 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The R7 M360 has 1,550 million transistors on an 85 mm² die, for 12.4M per mm². The W4190M has 950 million transistors on 77 mm², a density of 12.3M per mm². The R7 M360's density is slightly higher.

Q: Are API feature levels identical?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (12_0 for the R7 M360, 11_1 for W4190M), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2. The R7 M360 lists Vulkan 1.2.170, the W4190M lists 1.2.170.

Specification Differences

Comparing the recorded specifications side by side, the key differences are in the chip, memory, and clock domains.

Core and clock: The Radeon R7 M360 uses the Mesos chip (GCN 3.0) with a base clock of 1,100 MHz and boost of 1,125 MHz. The FirePro W4190M uses the Opal chip (GCN 1.0), clocked at 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost.

Memory: The R7 M360 equips 2 GB of DDR3 at 900 MHz (1,800 Mbps effective), while the W4190M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 at 1,000 MHz (4,000 Mbps effective). The bus width is 128-bit on the W4190M versus 64-bit on the R7 M360, leading to the large bandwidth gap: 64.00 GB/s for the FirePro, 14.40 GB/s for the Radeon.

Compute and throughput: The R7 M360 has 384 shaders, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The W4190M matches that configuration: 384 shaders, 24 TMUs, 8 ROPs. The pixel rate is 9.000 GPixel/s on the R7 M360 versus 7.200 GPixel/s on the W4190M. Texture rate is 27.00 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s. FP32 is 864.0 GFLOPS versus 691.2 GFLOPS.

Bus and outputs: Both are PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs are portable-device-dependent on both parts. The W4190M is an MXM module; the R7 M360 does not list a slot width. Neither part lists power connectors.

Production: The R7 M360's production status is end-of-life, announced May 4, 2015. The W4190M is also end-of-life, announced November 11, 2015. Their successors and predecessors are listed in the database as noted above.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the AMD Radeon R7 M360 is the stronger part in raw compute metrics. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark, and its average score is 4,930 versus the FirePro W4190M's 4,505. The R7 M360 carries a higher base clock (1,100 MHz vs 825 MHz), higher boost (1,125 vs 900 MHz), higher FP32 throughput (864 vs 691.2 GFLOPS), and higher pixel and texture rates. It also has a slightly larger die, more transistor count, and higher transistor density. The FirePro W4190M's advantage is memory bandwidth: its 128-bit GDDR5 interface yields 64.00 GB/s, more than four times the R7 M360's 14.40 GB/s. The R7 M360 remains the choice when the workload is dominated by OpenCL compute performance and raw shader throughput. The W4190M is the part to consider when a memory-bandwidth-sensitive task dominates, due to its substantially wider memory path and faster GDDR5 memory, though its lower clocks will hold back its shader performance relative to the R7 M360.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon R7 M360 wins in:

• The recorded Geekbench OpenCL score: 4,638 vs 4,505, a 3% lead.
• FP32 compute: 864.0 GFLOPS vs 691.2 GFLOPS.
• Pixel throughput: 9.000 GPixel/s vs 7.200 GPixel/s.
• Texture fill rate: 27.00 GTexel/s vs 21.60 GTexel/s.
• Boost and base clocks: 1,125/1,100 MHz vs 900/825 MHz.
• Transistor count and die size: 1,550M on 85 mm² vs 950M on 77 mm².

AMD FirePro W4190M wins in:

• Memory bandwidth: 64.00 GB/s vs 14.40 GB/s (128-bit GDDR5 vs 64-bit DDR3).
• Memory clock and type: 1,000 MHz GDDR5 vs 900 MHz DDR3.
• Effective memory speed: 4,000 Mbps vs 1,800 Mbps.
• Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.

In a mobile GPU context, the R7 M360 is the compute and shader-bound choice. The W4190M is the bandwidth and memory-bound choice. For a workload with heavy memory traffic (e.g., large framebuffer effects, heavy texture bandwidth needs), the FirePro's 4.4x bandwidth advantage can overcome the R7 M360's clock advantage. For pure OpenCL compute with modest memory requirements, the R7 M360's 30% clock advantage (1,125 MHz vs 900 MHz boost) and 25% higher FP32 throughput make it the faster part.