AMD Radeon R5 M430 vs AMD Radeon R7 M360 Comparison

The data presents a close contest between two end-of-life mobile GPUs from AMD’s Gem System generation. The AMD Radeon R5 M430 and AMD Radeon R7 M360 split their two head-to-head benchmark wins exactly, with each taking one test. The R5 M430 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5152 against the R7 M360’s 4638, a delta of 11.1%. The R7 M360 counters in the Geekbench Vulkan test, scoring 5223 versus 4884, a 6.5% advantage. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical: the R5 M430 averages 5018, while the R7 M360 averages 4931. Both sit in the bottom third of all GPUs, with the R5 M430 at the 30th percentile and the R7 M360 at the 29th percentile.

The Verdict

The benchmark data does not declare a single victor; it describes a trade-off between compute and graphics API performance. The AMD Radeon R5 M430 is the choice for OpenCL compute workloads, as its 5152 score is 11.1% higher than the R7 M360’s 4638 in that test. Conversely, the AMD Radeon R7 M360 is better suited for Vulkan-based applications, where its 5223 score surpasses the R5 M430’s 4884 by 6.5%. For a user whose software relies on Vulkan, the R7 M360 offers a tangible lead. For general-purpose compute tasks using OpenCL, the R5 M430 is the faster part. The overall average scores are within 1.7% of each other (5018 versus 4931), indicating that in mixed workloads, neither GPU offers a decisive advantage. The R5 M430’s nearest rival, the AMD FirePro W4170M, scores 5034, a 0.3% difference, while the R7 M360’s closest competitor, the AMD Radeon R7 M265, scores 4929, a 0% delta. These figures suggest both GPUs are firmly in the entry-level mobile segment. The data shows no clear overall winner; the correct pick depends entirely on the target API.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architecture generations despite sharing the same 28 nm TSMC process node. The AMD Radeon R5 M430 is built on the Jet chip using the GCN 1.0 architecture, while the AMD Radeon R7 M360 uses the Meso chip with the GCN 3.0 architecture. This architectural gap is reflected in their feature sets. The R5 M430 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), whereas the R7 M360 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), indicating a more complete DirectX 12 feature level on the newer architecture. Both GPUs support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. The transistor counts differ substantially: the R5 M430 packs 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, while the R7 M360 houses 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die. Their transistor densities are nearly identical at 12.3M / mm² and 12.4M / mm², respectively, showing that the R7 M360’s larger die is simply scaled up. The R7 M360 also gains FP16 support at 864.0 GFLOPS (1:1), a capability the R5 M430 lacks entirely. Both are end-of-life products with the same predecessor (Solar System) and successor (Polaris Mobile), but the R7 M360 has a recorded release date of 2015-05-04, while the R5 M430 has no release date listed.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M430 wins in compute throughput and memory capacity. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 5152 is 11.1% higher than the R7 M360’s 4638. This compute advantage is supported by its higher memory size of 4 GB, double the R7 M360’s 2 GB. The R5 M430 also has a higher memory bandwidth of 16.00 GB/s compared to 14.40 GB/s, despite both using DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus. The R5 M430’s base clock of 780 MHz and boost clock of 855 MHz are lower than the R7 M360’s 1100 MHz and 1125 MHz, yet it still wins the OpenCL test, suggesting the extra memory capacity and bandwidth play a role. The AMD Radeon R7 M360 wins in Vulkan performance and raw shader throughput. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 5223 beats the R5 M430’s 4884 by 6.5%. The R7 M360 has 384 shading units versus 320, 24 texture units versus 20, and a higher FP32 rate of 864.0 GFLOPS against 547.2 GFLOPS. Its pixel rate is 9.000 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 27.00 GTexel/s, compared to 6.840 GPixel/s and 17.10 GTexel/s for the R5 M430. The R7 M360’s higher clocks and more numerous execution units give it the edge in API-bound tasks like Vulkan.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M430 scores 5152 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 11.1% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M360’s 4638.

Q: Which GPU is faster in Vulkan benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M360 scores 5223 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 6.5% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M430’s 4884.

Q: Do these GPUs support different DirectX versions?

A: Yes. The R5 M430 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the R7 M360 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), giving the R7 M360 a higher feature level.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The R5 M430 has 4 GB of DDR3 memory, while the R7 M360 has 2 GB of DDR3 memory.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two chips?

A: The R5 M430 has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, while the R7 M360 has 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both the R5 M430 and the R7 M360 are listed as end-of-life products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a clear split. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R5 M430 wins decisively with a score of 5152 against the AMD Radeon R7 M360’s 4638. This 11.1% delta is the largest margin in either test. The R5 M430’s victory here is notable given its lower clocks; the base clock is 780 MHz versus 1100 MHz, and the boost clock is 855 MHz versus 1125 MHz. The R5 M430 compensates with 4 GB of memory and 16.00 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the R7 M360’s 2 GB and 14.40 GB/s. In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the tables turn. The R7 M360 scores 5223, beating the R5 M430’s 4884 by 6.5%. This win aligns with the R7 M360’s architectural advantages: 384 shading units, 24 texture units, and a peak FP32 rate of 864.0 GFLOPS. The R7 M360’s texture rate of 27.00 GTexel/s is 58% higher than the R5 M430’s 17.10 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate of 9.000 GPixel/s exceeds the R5 M430’s 6.840 GPixel/s. The R7 M360 also has a higher memory clock of 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) versus the R5 M430’s 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), though the R5 M430’s wider effective bandwidth wins out. The overall average benchmark scores are close: the R5 M430 averages 5018, and the R7 M360 averages 4931. The R5 M430 sits at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, while the R7 M360 sits at the 29th. The R5 M430’s nearest rival, the AMD FirePro W4170M, is 0.3% behind, while the R7 M360’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R7 M265, is exactly tied at 0% delta.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across several core specifications. The chip design differs: the R5 M430 uses the Jet chip, while the R7 M360 uses the Meso chip. Their architectures are GCN 1.0 and GCN 3.0, respectively. The process node is identical at 28 nm from TSMC, but transistor counts diverge sharply: 690 million for the R5 M430 and 1,550 million for the R7 M360. Die size is 56 mm² for the R5 M430 and 125 mm² for the R7 M360, with nearly equal transistor densities of 12.3M / mm² and 12.4M / mm². Clock speeds favor the R7 M360: its base clock is 1100 MHz versus 780 MHz, and its boost clock is 1125 MHz versus 855 MHz. Memory configurations differ in size and bandwidth, with the R5 M430 offering 4 GB and 16.00 GB/s, while the R7 M360 offers 2 GB and 14.40 GB/s; both use DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. The shading units count is 320 for the R5 M430 and 384 for the R7 M360. Texture units are 20 versus 24, while ROPs are equal at 8. Pixel rate is 6.840 GPixel/s for the R5 M430 and 9.000 GPixel/s for the R7 M360. Texture rate is 17.10 GTexel/s versus 27.00 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 547.2 GFLOPS for the R5 M430 and 864.0 GFLOPS for the R7 M360; only the R7 M360 lists FP16 at 864.0 GFLOPS (1:1). The DirectX support differs: the R5 M430 supports 12 (11_1), while the R7 M360 supports 12 (12_0). Both share OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8 for both. The R5 M430 has a slot width of IGP, while the R7 M360 has no slot width listed. Display outputs are listed as portable device dependent for the R5 M430, with no listing for the R7 M360. The R7 M360 has a release date of 2015-05-04, while the R5 M430 has none. Both are end-of-life, with the same predecessor and successor names.