AMD Radeon R7 M460 vs AMD Radeon R9 M360 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a single head-to-head benchmark between these two mobile GPUs, and the result is decisive. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R9 M360 scores 8211, while the AMD Radeon R7 M460 scores 6612. That is a 24.2% advantage for the R9 M360, a substantial margin that places the two parts in different performance tiers despite their shared AMD branding.

The R9 M360’s average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 8129, compared to the R7 M460’s 6612. This gap is consistent with the head-to-head result. The R9 M360 sits at the 42nd percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the R7 M460 sits at the 38th percentile. In practical terms, the R9 M360 is not only faster than the R7 M460, it also ranks closer to mid-pack overall, whereas the R7 M460 falls further down the distribution.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database provides additional context. The R9 M360’s average score of 8129 places it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M (8135), meaning the two are effectively tied in aggregate performance. It is also 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 945M (8099) and 0.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (8167). The R9 M360 is 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GRID K2 (8080). These deltas are all within noise, but they show that the R9 M360 competes with a well-known mid-range laptop GPU from NVIDIA.

The R7 M460, by contrast, sits in a lower tier. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 7730M at 6581, which the R7 M460 beats by 0.5%. It is also 0.9% ahead of the Intel UHD Graphics P750 (6554) and 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M (6513). The only rival above it is the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 at 6698, which beats the R7 M460 by 1.3%. None of these deltas are large, but the overall picture is clear: the R7 M460 trades blows with older or entry-level parts, while the R9 M360 aligns with more capable hardware.

One benchmark is a limited sample, but the magnitude of the delta (24.2%) is large enough that the conclusion is robust. The R9 M360 wins the only direct comparison available, and its aggregate score corroborates that result.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360 has an average benchmark score of 8129, while the AMD Radeon R7 M460 has an average score of 6612. The R9 M360 is about 23% higher in aggregate.

Q: How does the R9 M360 compare to NVIDIA’s GTX 950M?

A: The R9 M360’s average score of 8129 is 0.1% below the GTX 950M’s 8135. The two are effectively neck-and-neck in the database’s measurements.

Q: Is the R7 M460 closer to the R9 M360 or to entry-level integrated graphics?

A: The R7 M460’s score of 6612 is much closer to the Intel UHD Graphics P750 (6554, 0.9% ahead) and the AMD Radeon HD 7730M (6581, 0.5% ahead) than to the R9 M360’s 8211. The gap to the R9 M360 is 24.2%.

Q: What is the direct head-to-head result between these two GPUs?

A: The only head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, where the R9 M360 scores 8211 against the R7 M460’s 6612. The R9 M360 wins by 24.2%.

Q: Does the R7 M460 beat any of its nearest rivals?

A: Yes, the R7 M460 is 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 7730M, 0.9% ahead of the Intel UHD Graphics P750, and 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 by 1.3%.

Q: Which GPU has the higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The R9 M360 is at the 42nd percentile, while the R7 M460 is at the 38th percentile. This indicates the R9 M360 outperforms a larger share of the database’s GPU pool.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different points in AMD’s architecture timeline. The R9 M360 uses the Tropo chip based on GCN 1.0, while the R7 M460 uses the Meso chip based on GCN 3.0. This is a meaningful generational split: GCN 1.0 is an older design, whereas GCN 3.0 introduces architectural refinements that improve efficiency and feature support.

Both are built on the same 28 nm process at TSMC, which limits the comparison to architectural rather than process advantages. The R9 M360 packs 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.2 million per mm². The R7 M460 has 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, with a density of 12.4 million per mm². The R7 M460 is slightly larger in both transistor count and die area, but the difference is minor.

The R9 M360 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. The R7 M460 has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and only 8 raster operation units. This means the R9 M360 has a 33% higher shading unit count, a 33% higher TMU count, and a 100% higher ROP count. These are substantial differences that directly affect pixel fill and texture throughput.

Clock speeds tell a more nuanced story. The R9 M360 has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 925 MHz. The R7 M460 has a lower base clock of 730 MHz but a higher boost clock of 1024 MHz. The boost behavior is different, and the R7 M460’s higher boost does not compensate for its lower resource counts. The memory clock is identical at 1125 MHz, translating to 4.5 Gbps effective for both.

The memory subsystem is a major point of divergence. The R9 M360 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M460 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 36.00 GB/s. The R9 M360 has exactly double the memory bus width and double the bandwidth. This is a critical advantage for the R9 M360 in memory-intensive workloads.

The bus interface also differs. The R9 M360 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the R7 M460 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. This halves the potential data transfer rate to the host CPU for the R7 M460, which can matter in scenarios where textures and geometry are streamed from system memory.

API support shows a feature-level gap. The R9 M360 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the R7 M460 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). The R7 M460’s higher DirectX feature level reflects its newer GCN 3.0 design. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. The R7 M460 also lists FP16 at 786.4 GFLOPS (1:1), meaning it can do half-precision at the same rate as FP32, but the R9 M360 does not list an FP16 figure.

The R9 M360’s pixel rate is 14.80 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 29.60 GTexel/s. The R7 M460’s pixel rate is 8.192 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 24.58 GTexel/s. The R9 M360 is 80% faster in pixel fill and about 20% faster in texture fill. FP32 compute is 947.2 GFLOPS for the R9 M360 versus 786.4 GFLOPS for the R7 M460, a 20% advantage for the R9 M360.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates a clear hierarchy: the AMD Radeon R9 M360 outperforms the AMD Radeon R7 M460 by a wide margin. The 24.2% head-to-head delta in Geekbench OpenCL is the most direct evidence, and the aggregate scores (8129 vs 6612) reinforce that gap. The R9 M360 also holds the advantage in every major hardware specification that affects compute and rendering throughput: more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, double the memory bandwidth, and a wider bus interface.

The R7 M460 does have a newer architecture (GCN 3.0 vs GCN 1.0) and a higher DirectX feature level (12_0 vs 11_1), but the data shows that these do not translate into a performance win. The R7 M460 also has a higher boost clock (1024 MHz vs 925 MHz), yet its lower base clock and reduced resource counts cannot overcome the R9 M360’s hardware advantage. The FP16 support on the R7 M460 is a feature difference, but no benchmark in the database measures FP16 performance for either card.

For anyone choosing between these two in a laptop, the R9 M360 is the stronger performer in every recorded test. The R7 M460’s only advantages are architectural modernity and a slightly higher boost clock, but those do not show up in the benchmark results. The data supports the R9 M360 as the superior choice for raw compute and rendering workloads.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the AMD Radeon R9 M360 and the AMD Radeon R7 M460:

• Chip: Tropo vs Meso
• Architecture: GCN 1.0 vs GCN 3.0
• Transistors: 1,500 million vs 1,550 million
• Die Size: 123 mm² vs 125 mm²
• Transistor Density: 12.2M / mm² vs 12.4M / mm²
• Base Clock: 900 MHz vs 730 MHz
• Boost Clock: 925 MHz vs 1024 MHz
• Memory Size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• Memory Bus Width: 128 bit vs 64 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 72.00 GB/s vs 36.00 GB/s
• Shading Units: 512 vs 384
• TMUs: 32 vs 24
• ROPs: 16 vs 8
• Pixel Rate: 14.80 GPixel/s vs 8.192 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 29.60 GTexel/s vs 24.58 GTexel/s
• FP32: 947.2 GFLOPS vs 786.4 GFLOPS
• FP16: Not listed vs 786.4 GFLOPS (1:1)
• Bus Interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 vs PCIe 3.0 x8
• DirectX: 12 (11_1) vs 12 (12_0)
• Release Date: 2015-05-04 vs 2016-05-14

Fields that are identical include the 28 nm process node, TSMC foundry, 1125 MHz memory clock, 4.5 Gbps effective memory speed, GDDR5 memory type, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.170, end-of-life production status, and the same predecessor and successor entries.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R9 M360 wins in all measured performance benchmarks. It is 24.2% ahead in Geekbench OpenCL, and its average score of 8129 is far above the R7 M460’s 6612. The R9 M360 also wins in every hardware metric that drives traditional GPU workloads: shading units, texture units, raster operations, memory bandwidth, and bus width. For gaming at typical laptop resolutions, for compute tasks such as OpenCL acceleration, and for any workload that relies on pixel fill or texture throughput, the R9 M360 is the clear choice.

The AMD Radeon R7 M460 has no benchmark wins in the recorded data. Its advantages are limited to architectural features that do not translate into measured performance. It has a newer GCN 3.0 architecture, which brings a higher DirectX 12 feature level (12_0 vs 11_1). It also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, which could be relevant for machine learning or media workloads that use half precision, though the database does not include an FP16 benchmark. The R7 M460’s higher boost clock of 1024 MHz suggests it may sustain higher clocks under light loads, but the R9 M360’s higher base clock and larger resource pool dominate in sustained compute.

In practical terms, the R9 M360 is the GPU for users who prioritize raw performance, memory bandwidth, and pixel fill. The R7 M460 is the GPU for users who need a newer API feature set or half-precision compute support, accepting a significant performance penalty. The data does not support choosing the R7 M460 for speed.