AMD Radeon R7 M360 vs NVIDIA Quadro M500M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data splits the two mobile graphics processors almost perfectly evenly, with each card taking one decisive win and one near-statistical tie. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Quadro M500M posts a score of 5986 against the AMD Radeon R7 M360's 4638, a delta of 29.1% in favor of NVIDIA. That is a commanding margin, not a marginal one. The Quadro M500M outperforms its rival by more than a quarter in this compute-oriented workload, which is a substantial gap for two parts that share the same 2 GB DDR3 memory configuration and 64-bit bus.

The Vulkan test tells a completely different story. Here the AMD Radeon R7 M360 scores 5223, while the NVIDIA Quadro M500M scores 5222. The delta is 0%, essentially a dead heat. In practical terms, this means that for graphics API workloads using Vulkan, the two cards are interchangeable in performance. The AMD card wins by a single point, which is within any reasonable margin of error. This split result, one decisive NVIDIA win and one exact tie, is reflected in the overall win count: each card claims one benchmark victory.

Looking at the broader database context, the Quadro M500M holds an average benchmark score of 5604, placing it in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro M4000 at 5537 (1.2% slower), the AMD Radeon HD 8790M at 5691 (1.5% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 at 5508 (1.7% slower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M at 5501 (1.9% slower). The data shows the Quadro M500M sits in a tight cluster where a few percentage points separate several competing mobile parts. It is neither a standout nor a laggard within this immediate peer group.

The AMD Radeon R7 M360, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 4931, placing it in the 29th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 M265 at 4929 (0% difference), the AMD FirePro W5130M at 4904 (0.6% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB at 4901 (0.6% faster), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 at 4893 (0.8% faster). The R7 M360 is effectively tied with its closest competitors, all within a single percentage point. This suggests the AMD part is firmly anchored in a performance tier that is roughly 13% below the Quadro M500M's average score (4931 vs 5604, a difference of 673 points).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M500M wins decisively, scoring 5986 versus the AMD Radeon R7 M360's 4638. That is a 29.1% advantage for the NVIDIA part.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the AMD card wins?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon R7 M360 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test by a single point, 5223 to 5222. The delta is 0%, so this is effectively a tie, but the AMD card is credited with the victory.

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

A: The Quadro M500M's average score of 5604 places it 1.2% ahead of the AMD FirePro M4000 and 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce MX130, but 1.5% behind the AMD Radeon HD 8790M. The R7 M360's average of 4931 is statistically tied with the Radeon R7 M265 (0% delta) and within 0.8% of the GeForce GTS 450.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M500M ranks in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the AMD Radeon R7 M360 ranks in the 29th percentile.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both use 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering identical bandwidth of 14.40 GB/s.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M360 has a boost clock of 1125 MHz, which is just 1 MHz higher than the NVIDIA Quadro M500M's boost of 1124 MHz. The base clocks differ more: AMD runs at 1100 MHz, NVIDIA at 1029 MHz.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear but nuanced conclusion. For users prioritizing compute performance in OpenCL workloads, the NVIDIA Quadro M500M is the superior choice. Its 29.1% lead in that benchmark is the single largest margin recorded in this head-to-head comparison. The Quadro M500M also carries a higher average benchmark score overall, 5604 versus 4931, and a higher percentile ranking, 32nd versus 29th. If the task involves general compute or legacy API acceleration, the NVIDIA card is the one to pick.

However, for Vulkan-based applications, the choice is effectively neutral. Both cards deliver within one point of each other, so there is no practical performance difference in that API. The AMD Radeon R7 M360 does have a slightly higher boost clock (1125 MHz vs 1124 MHz) and a notably higher texture rate (27.00 GTexel/s vs 17.98 GTexel/s), which may influence certain workloads that are texture-bound rather than compute-bound. But the benchmark scores show that this architectural advantage does not translate into a measurable win in the recorded tests.

The production status for both parts is end-of-life, and neither has a launch MSRP in the database. For a builder selecting between these two used or legacy mobile GPUs, the decision should rest on the primary workload. OpenCL-heavy tasks favor NVIDIA by a wide margin. Vulkan or mixed workloads show no clear winner. The overall average score favors NVIDIA, so if the use case is unknown, the Quadro M500M is the safer bet based on the aggregate data.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several key specifications, though they share the same memory subsystem. Both have 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth, and both have 384 shading units and 8 ROPs. The differences start with the chip and architecture. The NVIDIA Quadro M500M uses the GM108S chip on the Maxwell architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 1,020 million transistors on a die size of 77 mm², giving a transistor density of 13.2M per mm². The AMD Radeon R7 M360 uses the Meso chip on the GCN 3.0 architecture, also on 28 nm at TSMC, but with 1,550 million transistors on a larger 125 mm² die, yielding a lower density of 12.4M per mm².

Clock speeds differ modestly. The NVIDIA card has a base clock of 1029 MHz and a boost of 1124 MHz. The AMD card runs a base of 1100 MHz and a boost of 1125 MHz. The AMD part is slightly faster at both clock states, but the memory clock is identical at 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective. The texture units differ significantly: NVIDIA has 16 TMUs, while AMD has 24 TMUs. This drives a large gap in texture rate, 17.98 GTexel/s for NVIDIA versus 27.00 GTexel/s for AMD. Pixel rates are nearly identical, with NVIDIA at 8.992 GPixel/s and AMD at 9.000 GPixel/s.

FP32 compute is also very close: NVIDIA delivers 863.2 GFLOPS, AMD delivers 864.0 GFLOPS. The AMD card additionally supports FP16 at 864.0 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the NVIDIA card has no listed FP16 capability. The bus interface differs: NVIDIA uses MXM-A (3.0), while AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x8. NVIDIA lists its slot width as MXM Module, and its display outputs as portable device dependent, while AMD does not list slot width or display outputs. The TDP is listed only for NVIDIA, at 30 W; AMD has no TDP figure in the database.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two parts is substantial. The NVIDIA Quadro M500M is built on Maxwell, a generation designed for efficient compute and power management. It uses a relatively small die, 77 mm², with 1,020 million transistors. The AMD Radeon R7 M360 employs GCN 3.0, which is a more complex architecture with 1,550 million transistors packed into a 125 mm² die. This explains why AMD has 24 texture units versus NVIDIA's 16, despite having the same shading unit count and ROP count. The GCN architecture is known for its broader shader array and higher texture throughput, which is reflected in the 27.00 GTexel/s texture rate versus 17.98 GTexel/s for NVIDIA.

Feature support differs in the API stack. The NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The AMD part has a higher DirectX feature level, 12_0 versus 11_0, which could matter for certain games or applications that require DX12 feature level 12. However, the benchmark data does not show a corresponding performance advantage in the recorded tests. The AMD card also offers FP16 compute at full rate, while NVIDIA does not list FP16 support, which could be relevant for workloads that use half-precision arithmetic.

The generation naming reflects different product lines: NVIDIA lists its generation as Quadro Maxwell-M (Mx000M), while AMD lists Gem System (R7 M300). The release dates differ, with AMD launching earlier on May 4, 2015, and NVIDIA following on April 26, 2016. Both are now end-of-life. The predecessor and successor names also differ: NVIDIA came from Quadro Kepler-M and passed to Quadro Pascal-M, while AMD came from Solar System and passed to Polaris Mobile.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro M500M wins in OpenCL compute workloads. Its 5986 score versus 4638 is a 29.1% advantage, making it the clear pick for applications that rely on OpenCL acceleration, such as certain video encoding, physics simulation, or data processing tasks. The Quadro M500M also wins on overall average benchmark score (5604 versus 4931) and percentile ranking (32nd versus 29th). For any mixed workload where the API is unknown, the aggregate data favors NVIDIA.

The AMD Radeon R7 M360 wins in Vulkan performance, albeit by a razor-thin margin of one point (5223 versus 5222). This is not a meaningful victory in practical terms, but it does indicate that for Vulkan-native applications, the AMD card is at least equal to the NVIDIA part. The AMD card also has a higher texture rate (27.00 GTexel/s) and more texture units (24 versus 16), which could give it an edge in texture-heavy rendering scenarios that are not captured by the two recorded benchmarks. Its higher base clock (1100 MHz versus 1029 MHz) and boost clock (1125 MHz versus 1124 MHz) suggest it has slightly better raw clock headroom.

For a specific use case, the choice is straightforward. If the software stack is known to use OpenCL, the Quadro M500M is the only rational selection. If the workload is Vulkan-based, the two cards are indistinguishable in the data, so other factors such as driver support, thermals, or system integration would decide. If the workload is unknown, the higher average score and percentile of the Quadro M500M make it the safer default. The AMD card's advantages in texture throughput and FP16 compute are real but did not translate into a benchmark win in the recorded tests, aside from the Vulkan tie.