AMD Radeon R9 M360 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360 has a higher average benchmark score of 8129, compared to the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580's 7170. The AMD part sits at the 42nd percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 39th percentile. However, the two benchmark results tell a more complex story, as the Intel part wins OpenCL while the AMD part wins Vulkan.

Q: What do the nearest rival comparisons show for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, which scores 8135, a 0.1% difference. It is also within 0.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 and within 0.6% of the NVIDIA GRID K2. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE at 7171, a 0% difference, with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 just 0.2% behind.

Q: Which API does each GPU support at a higher level?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3, while the AMD Radeon R9 M360 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. This means the Intel part has a more modern API feature set.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. The AMD part's dedicated memory is a significant advantage.

Q: What are the transistor and process node details?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360 is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.2M per mm². The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 is built on Intel's 14 nm+ process, with no transistor count or die size listed in the database.

Q: Which GPU has the higher pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360 has a pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 has a pixel rate of 9.000 GPixel/s. The AMD part is about 64% higher in this metric. However, the Intel part has a much higher texture rate of 72.00 GTexel/s versus 29.60 GTexel/s.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R9 M360 uses the Tropo chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, part of the Gem System (R9 M300) generation. It is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 1,500 million transistors packed into a 123 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.2M per mm². The architecture is a discrete GPU design, using a PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 uses the Skylake GT4e chip based on Generation 9.0 architecture, part of the HD Graphics-W (Skylake) generation. It is built on Intel's 14 nm+ process, and the database does not list transistor count or die size. This is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) that connects via Ring Bus, meaning it shares the system's memory rather than having dedicated VRAM.

The compute configurations differ substantially. The AMD part has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster output units (ROPs). The Intel part has 576 shading units, 72 TMUs, and only 9 ROPs. The higher TMU count on the Intel part explains its texture rate advantage, while the higher ROP count on the AMD part explains its pixel rate advantage.

Clock behavior also differs. The AMD Radeon R9 M360 runs at a 900 MHz base clock with a 925 MHz boost clock. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 has a much lower 350 MHz base clock but boosts to 1000 MHz. The Intel part also has a listed TDP of 15 W, while the AMD part has no TDP listed in the database.

Memory architecture is a fundamental difference. The AMD part uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel part uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The AMD part's memory runs at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). The Intel part has no independent memory clock because it relies on system memory.

The AMD Radeon R9 M360's predecessor is listed as Solar System and its successor as Polaris Mobile. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 has no predecessor or successor listed in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results from the database show a split decision. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 scores 9082 against the AMD Radeon R9 M360's 8211, giving the Intel part a 9.6% lead. This is a substantial margin and reflects the Intel part's higher shading unit count and texture throughput.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD Radeon R9 M360 scores 8047 against the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580's 5258, giving the AMD part a 53% lead. This is a dominant victory for the AMD part and the largest delta between the two in either test.

The averaged result puts the AMD Radeon R9 M360 at 8129 versus 7170 for the Intel part. The Intel part's Vulkan score drags its average down significantly, while the AMD part's scores are much more consistent across the two tests.

Looking at nearest rivals for context, the AMD Radeon R9 M360's 8129 average is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M at 8135 (0.1% difference) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 at 8167 (0.5% difference). The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580's 7170 average matches the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE at 7171 exactly, and it trails the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile by only 0.5%.

The Intel part's OpenCL win is notable because it shows the integrated GPU can outperform a discrete part in compute-heavy workloads. The AMD part's Vulkan win is equally notable because it shows the discrete GPU's advantage in a modern graphics API, likely due to its dedicated memory and higher pixel throughput.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R9 M360 | Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 |

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

| Process Node | 28 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm+ (Intel) |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | Not listed |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | Not listed |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | 350 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 925 MHz | 1000 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB GDDR5 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | System Shared |

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

| Shading Units | 512 | 576 |

| TMUs | 32 | 72 |

| ROPs | 16 | 9 |

| Pixel Rate | 14.80 GPixel/s | 9.000 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 29.60 GTexel/s | 72.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 947.2 GFLOPS | 1,152.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 2.304 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | Not listed | 15 W |

| Slot Width | Not listed | IGP |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

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

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2015-05-04 | 2015-08-31 |

The Intel part has a clear advantage in shading units, TMUs, texture rate, FP32 throughput, and FP16 support. The AMD part has a clear advantage in ROPs, pixel rate, and has dedicated memory. The Intel part also has a lower base clock but a higher boost clock.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R9 M360 wins decisively in Vulkan workloads, scoring 8047 versus 5258 for the Intel part, a 53% advantage. This makes it the better choice for applications and games that use the Vulkan API. Its dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 memory with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth is likely a key factor, as it does not compete with the CPU for system memory. The AMD part also has a higher pixel rate (14.80 GPixel/s versus 9.000 GPixel/s), which suggests an advantage in rasterization-heavy tasks.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 wins in OpenCL compute workloads, scoring 9082 versus 8211 for the AMD part, a 9.6% advantage. Its 576 shading units and 72 TMUs give it higher theoretical compute throughput (1,152.0 GFLOPS FP32 versus 947.2 GFLOPS). The texture rate of 72.00 GTexel/s is more than double the AMD part's 29.60 GTexel/s, making it well suited for texture-heavy workloads. It also supports FP16 at 2.304 TFLOPS, which the AMD part does not list.

The Intel part's 15 W TDP makes it a power-efficient option for systems where power consumption is a concern. As an IGP, it requires no separate card slot and its display outputs are motherboard dependent. The AMD part, being a discrete GPU, requires a PCIe slot.

The AMD part's average benchmark score of 8129 places it at the 42nd percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel part's 7170 places it at the 39th percentile. The AMD part also has more consistent performance across both APIs, while the Intel part's Vulkan score is notably weak.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear split based on workload. For Vulkan-based gaming and graphics workloads, the AMD Radeon R9 M360 is the stronger choice, with a 53% lead over the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 memory and higher pixel rate make it a more capable discrete graphics solution. The AMD part also has a higher average benchmark score (8129 versus 7170) and sits at a higher percentile of all GPUs.

For compute-heavy OpenCL workloads, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 is the better option, with a 9.6% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. Its higher shading unit count, double the texture rate, and FP16 support give it a theoretical compute advantage. The Intel part also supports a more modern DirectX 12 (12_1) feature level and Vulkan 1.3, making it more future-proof from an API standpoint.

System builders should choose the AMD Radeon R9 M360 if they need dedicated graphics memory and strong Vulkan performance in a discrete package. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 makes more sense for integrated, low-power systems (15 W TDP) where OpenCL compute performance and texture throughput matter more than pixel fill and Vulkan rendering. The 53% Vulkan gap is the single largest performance differential in the comparison, and it strongly favors the AMD part for gaming-oriented use cases.