AMD Radeon 550X vs AMD Radeon R9 M360 Comparison

# AMD Radeon 550X vs AMD Radeon R9 M360

The AMD Radeon 550X and AMD Radeon R9 M360 are two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from different eras of AMD's product stack. The 550X, built on the newer Polaris generation, and the R9 M360, from the older Gem System generation, show a clear generational gap in benchmark performance. Across the two head-to-head benchmark tests available, the Radeon 550X secures both wins, with its average benchmark score of 8918 placing it in the 45th percentile of all GPUs, while the R9 M360's average of 8129 lands in the 42nd percentile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive picture in favor of the AMD Radeon 550X. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the 550X scores 8866 against the R9 M360's 8211, yielding an 8% delta. This margin is consistent with the underlying compute capabilities of both chips, as the 550X's FP32 throughput of 1,247.2 GFLOPS substantially exceeds the R9 M360's 947.2 GFLOPS. The OpenCL result shows that the 550X's architectural improvements translate directly into raw compute performance, not just paper specifications.

The Vulkan test widens the gap further. Here, the 550X scores 8970 while the R9 M360 manages 8047, an 11.5% delta. This larger margin in Vulkan is particularly telling, as it suggests the 550X's GCN 4.0 architecture handles modern API workloads more efficiently than the R9 M360's GCN 1.0 design. The 550X supports Vulkan 1.3, while the R9 M360 is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170, and this API version difference likely contributes to the more pronounced performance gap in Vulkan-based workloads.

When placed against their respective nearest rivals, both cards occupy similar competitive positions. The 550X's average score of 8918 sits just 0.6% above the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100's 8863 and 0.8% above the AMD Radeon R9 M265X's 8851. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 by 1.2% and the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition by 1.3%. The R9 M360's average of 8129 is effectively tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, which scores 8135 for a -0.1% delta, and sits 0.4% above the NVIDIA GeForce 945M's 8099. It also falls 0.5% short of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980's 8167 and sits 0.6% above the NVIDIA GRID K2's 8080. These rival comparisons show that while the 550X holds a clear edge over the R9 M360, both cards are clustered with their immediate competitors rather than dominating them.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial and explains the benchmark results. The 550X uses the Lexa chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The R9 M360 uses the Tropo chip on the older GCN 1.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This process node difference is significant: the 14 nm node allows the 550X to pack 2,200 million transistors into a 103 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 21.4 million per mm². The R9 M360, despite its larger 123 mm² die, houses only 1,500 million transistors, resulting in a density of 12.2 million per mm². The 550X achieves nearly double the transistor density on a smaller physical die.

Clock speeds also favor the newer card. The 550X has a base clock of 1082 MHz and a boost clock of 1218 MHz, while the R9 M360 operates at 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost. This clock advantage, combined with the architectural improvements, explains the 550X's higher compute rates: its pixel rate of 19.49 GPixel/s and texture rate of 38.98 GTexel/s outpace the R9 M360's 14.80 GPixel/s and 29.60 GTexel/s.

Memory configurations present a trade-off. The 550X comes with 2 GB of GDDR5 memory running at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The R9 M360 offers 4 GB of GDDR5 at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) on the same 128-bit bus, but bandwidth drops to 72.00 GB/s. The 550X thus provides 55.6% more memory bandwidth, though the R9 M360 has double the capacity. In compute-heavy benchmarks, the 550X's bandwidth advantage appears more impactful than the R9 M360's capacity surplus.

Other architectural differences include shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, which are identical at 512, 32, and 16 respectively. The 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6, while the R9 M360 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The Vulkan support differs, with the 550X at version 1.3 and the R9 M360 at 1.2.170. The 550X also supports FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the R9 M360 lists no FP16 capability. The 550X interfaces via PCIe 3.0 x8, while the R9 M360 uses PCIe 3.0 x16; despite the narrower interface, the 550X's performance remains superior in the tested workloads.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD Radeon 550X across both benchmark tests. The 550X wins the OpenCL test by 8% and the Vulkan test by 11.5%, with an average score 9.7% higher than the R9 M360's. The newer architecture, higher clock speeds, greater memory bandwidth, and superior API support all contribute to this outcome. The 550X also achieves this performance with a 50 W TDP, whereas the R9 M360's power draw is not specified in the data.

For users prioritizing compute performance, particularly in Vulkan-based applications, the 550X is the clear choice. The 11.5% Vulkan advantage suggests it will handle modern graphics APIs more gracefully. However, the R9 M360's 4 GB memory capacity versus the 550X's 2 GB could matter for workloads that require larger framebuffers, though the benchmark data does not directly test this scenario. The 550X's 45th percentile ranking versus the R9 M360's 42nd percentile reinforces the overall performance hierarchy.

Users needing the highest raw compute and bandwidth should choose the 550X. Users who require greater memory capacity and can tolerate lower bandwidth and compute rates may consider the R9 M360, but the benchmark evidence offers no performance scenario where the older card wins. The 550X is simply the faster GPU in every measured test.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL performance?

A: The AMD Radeon 550X scores 8866 compared to the R9 M360's 8211, an 8% advantage for the 550X.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between these two cards?

A: The 550X scores 8970 in Vulkan versus 8047 for the R9 M360, giving the 550X an 11.5% lead.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same number of shading units?

A: Yes, both the 550X and R9 M360 feature 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation pipelines.

Q: Which card offers more memory bandwidth?

A: The 550X provides 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the R9 M360 offers 72.00 GB/s, making the 550X significantly faster in this regard.

Q: What are the process node differences between these chips?

A: The 550X is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the R9 M360 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The 550X's average score of 8918 is 0.6% above the Radeon Pro WX 5100 and 1.2% below the GeForce GTX 660. The R9 M360's 8129 average is 0.1% below the GeForce GTX 950M and 0.4% above the GeForce 945M.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 550X wins in every benchmark category measured. Its OpenCL score of 8866 and Vulkan score of 8970 both exceed the R9 M360's respective scores of 8211 and 8047. The 550X also wins on memory bandwidth at 112.0 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s, on pixel rate at 19.49 GPixel/s versus 14.80 GPixel/s, on texture rate at 38.98 GTexel/s versus 29.60 GTexel/s, and on FP32 compute at 1,247.2 GFLOPS versus 947.2 GFLOPS.

The R9 M360 holds advantages in memory capacity, offering 4 GB versus the 550X's 2 GB. It also has a wider PCIe interface at x16 versus x8, though this does not translate into benchmark wins. The R9 M360's transistor count of 1,500 million and die size of 123 mm² are larger physical characteristics, but the 550X's denser 14 nm process makes it more efficient.

In terms of ecosystem support, the 550X supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0), while the R9 M360 supports Vulkan 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (11_1). The 550X also supports FP16 at 1:1 ratio, which the R9 M360 lacks. The 550X's 50 W TDP is specified, while the R9 M360's power consumption is not listed in the data pack.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every core specification. The 550X uses the Lexa chip on GCN 4.0 architecture with a 14 nm process node from GlobalFoundries, while the R9 M360 uses the Tropo chip on GCN 1.0 architecture with a 28 nm process from TSMC. Transistor counts are 2,200 million versus 1,500 million, and die sizes are 103 mm² versus 123 mm², resulting in transistor densities of 21.4M per mm² and 12.2M per mm² respectively.

Clock speeds differ substantially: the 550X runs at 1082 MHz base and 1218 MHz boost, while the R9 M360 runs at 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost. Memory speed also differs, with the 550X at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) versus the R9 M360's 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). Memory capacity is 2 GB for the 550X and 4 GB for the R9 M360, both GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, but bandwidth is 112.0 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s.

Compute rates favor the 550X: pixel rate is 19.49 GPixel/s versus 14.80 GPixel/s, texture rate is 38.98 GTexel/s versus 29.60 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 1,247.2 GFLOPS versus 947.2 GFLOPS. The 550X supports FP16 at 1:1, while the R9 M360 lists no FP16. API support differs with Vulkan 1.3 versus 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (12_0) versus 12 (11_1). Bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8 for the 550X and PCIe 3.0 x16 for the R9 M360. The 550X has a 50 W TDP, a dual-slot form factor, no power connectors, and a 250 W suggested PSU, while the R9 M360 lacks these specifications. The 550X measures 145 mm (5.7 inches) in length and offers display outputs of 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, whereas the R9 M360 lists no dimensions or display outputs.