AMD Radeon R9 M360 vs Intel UHD Graphics 750 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R9 M360 and Intel UHD Graphics 750 represent two very different approaches to integrated and discrete graphics, separated by nearly six years of technology. The data shows a split decision: the R9 M360 dominates in OpenCL compute workloads, while the Intel part edges ahead in Vulkan performance. Both GPUs sit in the lower-middle tier of the performance spectrum, with the R9 M360 ranking at the 42nd percentile and the Intel UHD 750 at the 40th percentile among all GPUs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench results reveal a clear workload-dependent relationship between these two parts. In the OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R9 M360 scores 8,211 points, while the Intel UHD Graphics 750 manages only 6,743 points. This translates to a 21.8% advantage for the AMD part — a substantial margin that underscores the R9 M360’s dedicated memory bandwidth and higher raw compute throughput. The R9 M360’s average benchmark score of 8,129 further reinforces this lead, as it sits comfortably above the Intel part’s 7,441 average.

However, the Vulkan results tell a different story. Here, the Intel UHD Graphics 750 takes the win with a score of 8,138, narrowly edging out the R9 M360’s 8,047 points. The delta is just 1.1%, which is within the margin of noise for most real-world applications. This near-parity in Vulkan is notable because the two GPUs use fundamentally different architectures and memory systems. The Intel part’s ability to match a discrete GPU in this API suggests that its newer architecture handles modern graphics workloads more efficiently, even with less raw horsepower.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the R9 M360 sits between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M (average score 8,135, delta -0.1%) and the NVIDIA GeForce 945M (average score 8,099, delta 0.4%). It also trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 by just 0.5% (average score 8,167) and beats the NVIDIA GRID K2 by 0.6% (average score 8,080). For the Intel part, its closest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (average score 7,447, delta -0.1%), with the AMD Radeon R7 350 just behind (average score 7,425, delta 0.2%). The Intel UHD 750 also comes within 0.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (average score 7,472) and within 1.4% of the Intel Arc A310 (average score 7,550). These rival comparisons show both GPUs punching slightly above their weight class, though neither breaks into the upper tiers of performance.

Architecture Differences

The R9 M360 is built on AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The chip, codenamed Tropo, contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. This is a mature, proven design from the R9 M300 generation that launched in May 2015. In contrast, the Intel UHD Graphics 750 uses the Generation 12.1 architecture (commonly associated with Intel’s Xe graphics), fabricated on Intel’s 14 nm+++ process. This newer architecture, part of the Rocket Lake generation released in March 2021, brings modern feature support and efficiency improvements that the older GCN design lacks.

The memory configurations could hardly be more different. The R9 M360 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. This dedicated memory is a significant advantage for compute-heavy tasks, as it avoids contention with the CPU. The Intel UHD 750 uses System Shared memory, with its bandwidth described as “System Dependent.” This means its performance scales with the host system’s RAM speed and configuration, creating variability that doesn’t exist with the AMD part’s fixed GDDR5 setup.

Clock speeds and compute resources also diverge sharply. The R9 M360 runs at a base clock of 900 MHz with a boost of 925 MHz, while the Intel part idles at 300 MHz and boosts to 1,300 MHz. Despite the Intel part’s higher boost clock, the R9 M360 has more execution units: 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines, versus 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs for the Intel part. This 2:1 ratio in shading units explains the R9 M360’s compute advantage, as it can process twice as many threads per clock cycle.

The process node difference is stark: 28 nm versus 14 nm+++. This generational gap allows the Intel part to achieve higher clock speeds while consuming less power. The Intel UHD 750 has a TDP of just 15 W and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) that connects via the Ring Bus, while the R9 M360 is a discrete card using PCIe 3.0 x16. The AMD part’s TDP is not listed in the data, but as a discrete GPU, it inherently requires more power and space than an IGP.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360 has an average benchmark score of 8,129, compared to 7,441 for the Intel UHD Graphics 750. This represents a 9.2% advantage for the AMD part across the two tested workloads.

Q: Does the Intel UHD Graphics 750 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes. The Intel UHD Graphics 750 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 8,138, narrowly beating the R9 M360’s 8,047. The margin is just 1.1%, but it does give the Intel part one win in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The R9 M360 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M (delta -0.1%) and the NVIDIA GeForce 945M (delta 0.4%). The Intel UHD 750 is similarly matched with the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (delta -0.1%) and the AMD Radeon R7 350 (delta 0.2%).

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The R9 M360 uses 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel UHD 750 uses System Shared memory, with its bandwidth described as “System Dependent,” meaning it relies on the host system’s RAM.

Q: What API support does each GPU offer?

A: The R9 M360 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Intel UHD 750 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel part has a more recent DirectX and Vulkan implementation.

Q: Which GPU has the higher transistor count?

A: The R9 M360 has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, while the Intel UHD 750’s transistor count and die size are not listed in the data. The R9 M360’s transistor density is 12.2 million per square millimeter.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. The R9 M360 uses a 28 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel UHD 750 uses Intel’s 14 nm+++ process. The R9 M360’s chip is codenamed Tropo, whereas the Intel part uses the Rocket Lake chip. The R9 M360 has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die (density 12.2M/mm²), while the Intel part’s transistor count, die size, and density are not listed.

Clock speeds show the R9 M360 running at 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost, while the Intel part runs at 300 MHz base and 1,300 MHz boost. Memory differs completely: the R9 M360 has 4 GB 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 R9 M360 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, versus 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs for the Intel part.

Pixel and texture rates follow the hardware counts: the R9 M360 achieves 14.80 GPixel/s and 29.60 GTexel/s, while the Intel part achieves 10.40 GPixel/s and 20.80 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 947.2 GFLOPS for the R9 M360 versus 665.6 GFLOPS for the Intel part. The Intel part also lists FP16 performance of 1,331.2 GFLOPS (2:1), which the R9 M360 does not specify. The R9 M360 has no listed TDP, while the Intel part draws just 15 W and is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface. The Intel part’s display outputs are Motherboard Dependent, while the R9 M360’s are not listed. The R9 M360 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. The R9 M360 was released in May 2015 as an end-of-life product, while the Intel UHD 750 was released in March 2021 and is also end-of-life.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear trade-off between compute power and modern efficiency. The AMD Radeon R9 M360 is the superior choice for raw compute workloads, as evidenced by its 21.8% lead in OpenCL and its higher FP32 throughput of 947.2 GFLOPS versus 665.6 GFLOPS. Its dedicated 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent, predictable performance that system-shared memory cannot match. For users running OpenCL-accelerated applications, video encoding, or other compute-heavy tasks, the R9 M360 is the stronger option.

The Intel UHD Graphics 750, despite its lower compute scores, offers a more modern feature set. Its Vulkan 1.4 support and DirectX 12 (12_1) implementation are newer than the R9 M360’s Vulkan 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (11_1). The Intel part also wins the Vulkan benchmark outright, suggesting it handles modern graphics APIs more efficiently. Its 15 W TDP and integrated design make it suitable for compact, low-power systems where a discrete GPU is impractical. The near-tie with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (delta -0.4%) in average score is particularly impressive for an integrated part.

Neither GPU is a performance leader. The R9 M360 sits at the 42nd percentile and the Intel UHD 750 at the 40th percentile among all GPUs. Both are end-of-life products with no launch MSRP listed in the data. For users who need compute density and dedicated memory, the R9 M360 is the clear pick. For users who need modern API support, low power consumption, and an integrated form factor, the Intel UHD 750 is the better choice.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R9 M360 wins in OpenCL compute performance, with a 21.8% advantage over the Intel part. This makes it the better option for applications that leverage OpenCL for general-purpose GPU computing, such as scientific simulations, image processing, or physics calculations. Its 2:1 advantage in shading units (512 versus 256) and higher texture fill rate (29.60 GTexel/s versus 20.80 GTexel/s) also give it a clear edge in traditional rasterization workloads where pixel throughput matters. The dedicated 72.00 GB/s memory bandwidth is another decisive factor, as it remains constant regardless of system RAM configuration.

The Intel UHD Graphics 750 wins in Vulkan performance, achieving 8,138 points versus 8,047 for the R9 M360. This makes it the better choice for Vulkan-based games and applications, which are becoming increasingly common in modern software. Its higher boost clock of 1,300 MHz, compared to the R9 M360’s 925 MHz, helps compensate for its lower shader count in API-efficient workloads. The Intel part’s support for Vulkan 1.4 versus the R9 M360’s Vulkan 1.2.170 means it can take advantage of newer API features and optimizations. Additionally, its 15 W TDP makes it the only viable option for fanless or ultra-portable designs where the R9 M360’s discrete form factor cannot fit. The Intel part’s FP16 performance of 1,331.2 GFLOPS also suggests better support for half-precision workloads, though the R9 M360’s FP16 capabilities are not listed for comparison.