AMD Radeon R9 M360 vs AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly between these two AMD mobile graphics solutions. The AMD Radeon R9 M360 wins both recorded head-to-head tests, taking the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan workloads with margins of 10.4% and 15.5% respectively. There is no test in the database where the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile comes out ahead. That makes the R9 M360 the straightforward pick for raw compute performance in the two measured APIs.

However, the use-case split is not merely about who wins, it is about what each part is designed to do. The R9 M360 is a discrete mobile GPU from the R9 M300 generation, built on GCN 1.0. It carries 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. That dedicated memory pool is a decisive advantage in workloads that repeatedly access the same datasets, since the Vega 8 Mobile must share system memory and its bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent". The R9 M360 also posts a higher pixel rate at 14.80 GPixel/s versus 8.808 GPixel/s, which suggests a clear edge in fill-rate-bound scenarios such as high-resolution texture blits or heavy overdraw.

The Vega 8 Mobile, by contrast, is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) inside the Raven Ridge-M generation. It is a GCN 5.0 part with a 25 W TDP and no power connectors, since it draws from the host platform. Its advantage is not in winning benchmarks but in occupying zero extra slot width and requiring no dedicated VRAM. For thin-and-light portable devices where the memory controller and system RAM handle frame buffering, the Vega 8 Mobile is the only option that physically fits. The data shows the R9 M360 is faster, but the Vega 8 Mobile is the part that can exist in an IGP-only design.

The recorded percentiles reinforce this split. The R9 M360 sits at the 42nd percentile among all GPUs, while the Vega 8 Mobile sits at the 39th. Both are mid-pack parts, but the R9 M360 is the stronger of the two in every measured category. The nearest rivals for the R9 M360 include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M at a 0.1% average score difference, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 at 0.5% ahead, the NVIDIA GeForce 945M at 0.4% behind, and the NVIDIA GRID K2 at 0.6% behind. The Vega 8 Mobile's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 at 0.3% behind, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE at 0.4% ahead, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 at 0.5% ahead, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 at 0.6% ahead. The R9 M360's competition is faster on average, yet it still manages a higher absolute score.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras of AMD design. The R9 M360 uses the Tropo chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The Vega 8 Mobile uses the Raven-M chip with GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. That process jump is substantial: the R9 M360 packs 1,500 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, for a transistor density of 12.2 million per mm². The Vega 8 Mobile integrates 4,940 million transistors into a 210 mm² die, for a density of 23.5 million per mm². The newer node nearly doubles the density, which is why the integrated part can carry over three times the transistor count despite a die that is not much larger.

The shader core counts are identical: both have 512 shading units and 32 texture mapping units. That is where the similarity ends. The R9 M360 has 16 ROPs, while the Vega 8 Mobile has only 8. The R9 M360 therefore achieves a higher pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s against the Vega 8 Mobile's 8.808 GPixel/s, despite the Vega part's higher texture rate of 35.23 GTexel/s versus 29.60 GTexel/s. The Vega 8 Mobile compensates with a much higher FP32 throughput of 1,127.4 GFLOPS against the R9 M360's 947.2 GFLOPS, and it alone supports FP16 at 2.255 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

Clock behavior differs dramatically. The R9 M360 runs a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost of 925 MHz, with memory at 1125 MHz or 4.5 Gbps effective. The Vega 8 Mobile has a 300 MHz base clock and a 1101 MHz boost. That low base clock is typical of an IGP that must idle aggressively to save power, while the boost clock is what the part reaches under load. The R9 M360's clocks are far more stable, since it is a discrete card with its own thermal solution.

Memory architecture is the largest functional divergence. The R9 M360 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding a fixed 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Vega 8 Mobile uses "System Shared" memory for size, type, bus width, and bandwidth. That means its performance depends entirely on the host laptop's RAM configuration, a variable the database cannot pin to a single number. API support also differs: the R9 M360 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the Vega 8 Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test is the first recorded comparison. The R9 M360 scores 8,211 points, while the Vega 8 Mobile scores 7,435. That is a 10.4% delta in favor of the discrete part. In practical terms, the R9 M360 delivers roughly a tenth more compute throughput in the OpenCL workload, which aligns with its higher pixel rate and dedicated memory bandwidth. The Vega 8 Mobile's higher FP32 ceiling of 1,127.4 GFLOPS does not translate into a win here, likely because the OpenCL workload is sensitive to memory latency and sustained bandwidth, both of which favor dedicated GDDR5.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows a wider gap. The R9 M360 scores 8,047 points against the Vega 8 Mobile's 6,970, a 15.5% delta. This is the R9 M360's largest win in the database. Vulkan workloads often stress driver overhead and memory access patterns, and the R9 M360's older GCN 1.0 architecture with its fixed memory subsystem appears to handle them more efficiently than the Vega 8 Mobile's shared-memory design. The Vega 8 Mobile's Vulkan 1.3 API support is newer, but that does not compensate for the hardware-level memory bottleneck.

The R9 M360's average benchmark score is 8,129, while the Vega 8 Mobile's is 7,203. That is a difference of 926 points, or roughly 12.9% when measured against the Vega part's average. The R9 M360 also ranks higher against its nearest rivals. Its closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, scores 8,135 on average, a mere 0.1% above the R9 M360. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 sits 0.5% higher, and the NVIDIA GeForce 945M sits 0.4% lower. The Vega 8 Mobile's closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750, scores 7,222, which is 0.3% higher. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE sit 0.5% and 0.4% higher respectively, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 sits 0.6% higher. In both cases, the AMD parts are competitive with their immediate neighbors, but the R9 M360 occupies a higher absolute performance tier.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two parts differ.

| Specification | AMD Radeon R9 M360 | AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 5.0 |

| Generation | Gem System (R9 M300) | Vega IGP (Raven Ridge-M) |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 4,940 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 210 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 23.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 925 MHz | 1101 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 72.00 GB/s | System Dependent |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 14.80 GPixel/s | 8.808 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 29.60 GTexel/s | 35.23 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 947.2 GFLOPS | 1,127.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 2.255 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | Not listed | 25 W |

| Slot Width | Not listed | IGP |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | IGP |

| Display Outputs | Not listed | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2015-05-04 | 2019-01-07 |

| Predecessor | Solar System | GCN 3.0 IGP |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | Navi II IGP |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 8,211 | 7,435 |

| Geekbench Vulkan | 8,047 | 6,970 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 8,129 | 7,203 |

| Percentile | 42 | 39 |

The two share the same manufacturer, shading unit count, TMU count, and OpenGL version. Everything else in the database differs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the recorded benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360 wins both head-to-head tests. It scores 8,211 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 7,435 for the Vega 8 Mobile, and 8,047 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 6,970.

Q: Why does the R9 M360 win if the Vega 8 Mobile has higher FP32 throughput?

A: The Vega 8 Mobile has 1,127.4 GFLOPS FP32 against the R9 M360's 947.2 GFLOPS, but the R9 M360 has dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 memory with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Vega 8 Mobile uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth, which appears to bottleneck its real-world compute results.

Q: What are the ROP and pixel rate differences?

A: The R9 M360 has 16 ROPs and a pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s. The Vega 8 Mobile has 8 ROPs and a pixel rate of 8.808 GPixel/s. The R9 M360 is roughly 68% higher in pixel throughput.

Q: Does the Vega 8 Mobile have any feature the R9 M360 lacks?

A: Yes, the Vega 8 Mobile supports FP16 at 2.255 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while FP16 is not listed for the R9 M360. It also supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3, compared to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170 for the R9 M360.

Q: How do the two compare in transistor density?

A: The Vega 8 Mobile has 23.5 million transistors per mm² on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process, while the R9 M360 has 12.2 million per mm² on a 28 nm TSMC process. The Vega part also has 4,940 million total transistors versus 1,500 million.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU?

A: The R9 M360's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M at 8,135 average score, 0.1% higher. The Vega 8 Mobile's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 at 7,222 average score, 0.3% higher.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon R9 M360 is the faster GPU in every recorded benchmark. It wins Geekbench OpenCL by 10.4% and Geekbench Vulkan by 15.5%, and it holds a higher average benchmark score of 8,129 against 7,203. It also has double the ROP count, a fixed 72.00 GB/s memory bandwidth, and a higher pixel rate. Anyone comparing these two purely on compute performance should choose the R9 M360 without hesitation.

The AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile is not without merit, but its merits are structural rather than performance-based. It is an IGP with a 25 W TDP, no power connectors, and System Shared memory. It fits in portable devices where a discrete card cannot, and it brings modern API support with DirectX 12 (12_1), Vulkan 1.3, and FP16 compute. Its 14 nm process delivers 4,940 million transistors at a density of 23.5M per mm², and its boost clock reaches 1101 MHz. For a system builder targeting an IGP-only design, the Vega 8 Mobile is the only viable choice between the two.

The verdict from the database is therefore a split decision by use case. For maximum measured performance in OpenCL and Vulkan workloads, select the R9 M360. For an integrated solution with no dedicated memory and a newer feature set, select the Vega 8 Mobile. The performance gap is real, but so is the form factor gap. The R9 M360 is a discrete card that needs a PCIe 3.0 x16 slot and dedicated GDDR5; the Vega 8 Mobile is soldered into the platform with zero slot width. The benchmark results favor the discrete part, while the integration requirements favor the IGP.