AMD Radeon 610M vs AMD Radeon R7 M360 Comparison

The AMD Radeon 610M and AMD Radeon R7 M360 represent two distinct approaches to mobile graphics, separated by seven years of silicon evolution. The Radeon 610M is an integrated graphics processor built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, while the Radeon R7 M360 is a dedicated entry-level GPU from the GCN 3.0 era. The recorded benchmark data shows a near split in performance, with each card winning one of the two standardized tests, yet the nature of those wins reveals deeper differences in API efficiency and architectural priorities.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test results place the two GPUs within 2.2% of each other, a margin that falls well within the noise floor of typical driver variance. The Radeon R7 M360 records 4638 points against 4535 points for the Radeon 610M. This result gives the older discrete card a slim lead, a 2.2% advantage in this compute-heavy workload. Notably, the Radeon 610M counters with 486.4 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput and 486.2 GFLOPS of FP16 performance at a 2:1 ratio, yet it still trails the R7 M360 in raw OpenCL score. The R7 M360 counters with 864.0 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput, nearly double the FP32 output of the newer chip.

Conversely, the Geekbench Vulkan test produces a decisive win for the Radeon 610M. Here the integrated GPU scores 6353 points against 5223 points, a 21.6% advantage over the R7 M360. This is the largest single win in the head-to-head comparison. The 21.6% margin is substantial, indicating that the RDNA 2.0 architecture leverages the modern Vulkan API far more effectively than the older GCN 3.0 design. The Radeon 610M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the R7 M360 is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170. The data shows a clear generational shift: the newer architecture excels in graphics-centric APIs, while the older card retains a slight edge in compute-oriented OpenCL tasks.

The average benchmark scores across all recorded tests reinforce this split. The Radeon 610M achieves an average score of 5444, placing it in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Radeon R7 M360 averages 4931, sitting in the 29th percentile. The 610M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 at 5467 (a 0.4% difference) and the AMD Radeon R7 M440 at 5483 (a 0.7% difference). The R7 M360's closest competitors are the AMD Radeon R7 M265 at 4929 (a 0% difference) and the AMD FirePro W5130M at 4904 (a 0.6% difference). These proximity scores suggest that both cards operate within a narrow performance cluster, but the 610M sits slightly higher in the overall distribution.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon R7 M360 takes the OpenCL benchmark, suggesting an advantage in traditional general-purpose compute workloads that rely on raw shading unit throughput. With 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs, the R7 M360 has a significantly wider execution width than the 128 shading units and 8 texture mapping units found in the 610M. The R7 M360 also offers dedicated memory bandwidth of 14.40 GB/s from its 64-bit DDR3 interface, whereas the 610M relies on system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. In scenarios where the host system provides limited shared memory bandwidth, the discrete card's dedicated 2 GB DDR3 pool may provide more consistent compute throughput.

The Radeon R7 M360 also holds an advantage in pixel fill rate, recording 9.000 GPixel/s against 7.600 GPixel/s for the 610M. This higher pixel rate may benefit certain legacy applications that are not optimized for modern graphics APIs, such as those running under DirectX 12 (12_0) support on the R7 M360 or the more advanced DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) on the 610M. The R7 M360's texture rate of 27.00 GTexel/s also outpaces the 15.20 GTexel/s of the 610M, a difference of roughly 77% based on the recorded numbers.

Conversely, the Radeon 610M dominates the Vulkan benchmark, indicating strong performance in games and applications that utilize the Vulkan API directly. The 610M's RDNA 2.0 architecture is engineered for modern graphics pipelines, as evidenced by its support for ray tracing cores (2 RT cores) and Vulkan 1.4 support. The 21.6% lead in Vulkan score is the clearest differentiator in the entire dataset. For any workload using Vulkan, the 610M is unequivocally the stronger performer, likely due to its higher boost clock of 1900 MHz (1500 MHz base) and a more efficient instruction scheduling.

Architecture Differences

The foundational difference lies in the process node and architecture. The Radeon 610M is fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process node, whereas the R7 M360 uses the older 28 nm process. This is a massive gap in transistor density, with the 610M's Mendocino chip measuring 100 mm² die size on 6 nm, and the R7 M360's Meso chip at 125 mm² on 28 nm with 1,550 million transistors and a density of 12.4 million transistors per mm². The newer process node alone explains many of the performance characteristics: the 610M boosts to 1900 MHz, while the R7 M360 boosts to 1125 MHz with a base of 1100 MHz. The 610M operates at a 1500 MHz base clock and 1900 MHz boost clock, with memory at 900 MHz effective speed and 1800 Mbps effective data rate on the R7 M360 side; the 610M has a memory clock of "System Shared" type and bus width of "System Shared".

Architecturally, the RDNA 2.0 architecture in the 610M is a partial redesign of graphics compute units with 128 shading units, whereas GCN 3.0 in the R7 M360 uses a design with 384 shading units. The R7 M360 has a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio (864.0 GFLOPS FP16), while the RDNA 2.0 implementation has a 2:1 ratio (972.8 GFLOPS FP16 output). The R7 M360 does not list RT cores, while the 610M lists 2 RT cores. The R7 M360 has 8 ROPs and 24 TMUs, and the 610M has 4 ROPs and 8 TMUs. The bus interface differs as well: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 610M versus PCIe 3.0 x8 on the R7 M360. Display outputs are listed as portable device dependent for the 610M, and the R7 M360 does not list display outputs in the database.

The APU nature of the 610M means it shares memory with the system, with no dedicated memory size or type, only "System Shared" for size, type, bus width, and bandwidth "System Dependent". The R7 M360 instead uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with a fixed 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The 610M runs at a 15 W TDP, while the R7 M360 has no TDP listed in the database; the 610M is an integrated GPU with no power connectors, while the R7 M360 does not list power connectors. The 610M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the R7 M360 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Specification Differences

The most significant specification differences between the two GPUs are centered on memory and compute resources. The R7 M360 provides a dedicated 2 GB DDR3 frame buffer with a 64-bit bus and 14.40 GB/s bandwidth, while the 610M uses system shared memory with no fixed capacity, bus width, or bandwidth, as its memory bandwidth is system dependent. The R7 M360 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, whereas the 610M has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. This gives the R7 M360 a 3x advantage in shading units, 3x in texture mapping units, and 2x in ROPs based on the recorded data.

Clock speeds differ substantially: the 610M has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 1900 MHz, while the R7 M360 has a base clock of 1100 MHz and a boost clock of 1125 MHz. The R7 M360 has a memory clock of 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while the 610M's memory clock is listed as system shared. The process node is 6 nm for the 610M versus 28 nm for the R7 M360. The R7 M360 has 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, while the 610M has no transistor count listed but a 100 mm² die size. The R7 M360 has a transistor density of 12.4 million transistors per mm², while the 610M has no density figure. The R7 M360 supports PCIe 3.0 x8, while the 610M supports PCIe 4.0 x8.

The R7 M360 has a pixel rate of 9.000 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 27.00 GTexel/s, while the 610M has a pixel rate of 7.600 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 15.20 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput is 864.0 GFLOPS for the R7 M360 versus 486.4 GFLOPS for the 610M. FP16 throughput is 864.0 GFLOPS (1:1) for the R7 M360 versus 972.8 GFLOPS (2:1) for the 610M. The R7 M360 has no TDP, no slot width, no power connectors, and no display outputs in the database. The 610M has a 15 W TDP, an IGP slot width, no suggested PSU and no listed length, while the 610M has no PCIe power connectors (none listed, meaning none required), and both have no listed dimensions in the database.

The production status shows both are end-of-life. The release dates differ: the 610M was released on 2022-09-19, while the R7 M360 was released on 2015-05-05 (based on the date fields). The 610M's predecessor is listed as Vega II IGP, and its successor is Navi III IGP; the R7 M360's predecessor is Solar System and successor is Polaris Mobile. Both have no launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU performs better in the Vulkan API?

A: The AMD Radeon 610M scores 6353 points in the Geekbench Vulkan test, which is 21.6% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M360's score of 5223 points. This is the largest margin in the head-to-head data.

Q: Does the Radeon R7 M360 have dedicated memory?

A: Yes, the Radeon R7 M360 has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with a bandwidth of 14.40 GB/s. The Radeon 610M uses system shared memory with no fixed size or bandwidth.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The Radeon 610M has an average benchmark score of 5444, placing it in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon R7 M360 averages 4931, in the 29th percentile. This is a difference of 513 points in favor of the 610M.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Radeon R7 M360 has 384 shading units, while the Radeon 610M has 128 shading units. The R7 M360 also has 24 texture mapping units and 8 ROPs, compared to 8 TMUs and 4 ROPs on the 610M.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No, the Radeon 610M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Radeon R7 M360 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). The 610M also supports Vulkan 1.4, whereas the R7 M360 supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What are the nearest rival cards for each GPU?

A: The Radeon 610M's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M440 with an average score of 5483, a 0.7% difference, and the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 at 5467, a 0.4% difference. The R7 M360's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M265 at 4929, with a 0% difference, and the AMD FirePro W5130M at 4904, a 0.6% difference.