AMD Radeon R9 M360 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data includes a single direct comparison between these two mobile graphics parts, and it is decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R9 M360 scores 8,211 points against 6,698 points for the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010. That is a 22.6% advantage for the AMD part. This is not a small margin; in real-world terms, a 22.6% lead in a compute-oriented benchmark typically translates into noticeably faster performance in OpenCL-accelerated applications and general GPU compute workloads.

The context of these scores matters. The AMD Radeon R9 M360 sits at the 42nd percentile of all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 8,129 across its two recorded tests (OpenCL and Vulkan). Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M averages 8,135 (0.1% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 averages 8,167 (0.5% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce 945M averages 8,099 (0.4% behind), and the NVIDIA GRID K2 averages 8,080 (0.6% behind). The R9 M360 is effectively in a dead heat with these four cards, none of which are more than 0.6% away from its average. This suggests the R9 M360 performs at a level comparable to entry-level desktop and mid-range mobile GPUs of its era, despite being a mobile part itself.

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010, on the other hand, sits at the 38th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 6,698 from its single recorded OpenCL result. Its nearest rivals are all AMD parts: the AMD Radeon R7 M370 averages 6,764 (1% ahead of the GT 1010), the AMD FirePro M5100 averages 6,830 (1.9% ahead), the AMD Radeon R7 M460 averages 6,612 (1.3% behind), and the AMD Radeon HD 7730M averages 6,581 (1.8% behind). The GT 1010 is also closely matched with its rivals, but the entire cluster sits roughly 1,400 points below the R9 M360's cluster. The gap between the two cards is far larger than the gaps within each card's rival group, which reinforces that the R9 M360 belongs to a higher performance tier.

The only head-to-head benchmark recorded, Geekbench OpenCL, goes to the AMD Radeon R9 M360, which registers one win against zero for the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010. There is no Vulkan result for the GT 1010 in the database, so the R9 M360's Vulkan score of 8,047 cannot be compared directly. Still, the OpenCL result alone provides a clear picture: the R9 M360 outpaces the GT 1010 by a substantial margin in the one compute test where both have data.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the AMD Radeon R9 M360 is the stronger performer. Its OpenCL score of 8,211 beats the GT 1010's 6,698 by 22.6%, and its average benchmark score of 8,129 places it 42nd percentile among all GPUs, compared to the GT 1010's 38th percentile and 6,698 average. If compute performance is the primary criterion, the choice is straightforward: the R9 M360 wins.

However, the GT 1010 is not without its own advantages, and those are not captured in the benchmark numbers. The GT 1010 is a more modern design: it was released in January 2021, whereas the R9 M360 came out in May 2015. The GT 1010 uses a 14 nm process node from Samsung, while the R9 M360 uses a 28 nm node from TSMC. The GT 1010 also has a lower power draw, with a TDP of 30 W and no power connectors required, plus a suggested PSU of 200 W. The R9 M360 has no TDP listed in the database, so a direct power comparison cannot be made, but the node difference strongly implies the GT 1010 is more efficient.

So who should pick which? If you need raw compute performance in OpenCL workloads, the R9 M360 is the clear winner based on the 22.6% delta. If you need a card that is newer, smaller, more power-efficient, and easier to install (single-slot, no power connectors, 147 mm length), the GT 1010 has the edge in those practical areas. The GT 1010 also supports a newer DirectX version (12_1 vs 11_1) and a newer Vulkan version (1.4 vs 1.2.170), which could matter for software compatibility in newer titles or APIs.

For a builder assembling a low-power, low-profile system where compute performance is secondary, the GT 1010 makes sense. For a builder who prioritizes compute throughput and does not care about power draw or physical size, the R9 M360 is the better pick. The data does not support calling the GT 1010 a performance competitor to the R9 M360; it is a different class of product.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360 scores 8,211 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 22.6% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010's score of 6,698.

Q: How does the R9 M360 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The R9 M360's average score of 8,129 is within 0.6% of all four of its nearest rivals: the GTX 950M (8,135), GTX 980 (8,167), 945M (8,099), and GRID K2 (8,080). It is effectively tied with all of them.

Q: How does the GT 1010 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GT 1010's average score of 6,698 is within 1.9% of its nearest rivals: the R7 M370 (6,764), FirePro M5100 (6,830), R7 M460 (6,612), and HD 7730M (6,581). It sits at the center of a cluster of similar-performing AMD parts.

Q: What is the difference in memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The R9 M360 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The GT 1010 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 48.06 GB/s. The R9 M360 has double the memory capacity and roughly 50% more bandwidth.

Q: What are the API differences between the two cards?

A: The R9 M360 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GT 1010 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GT 1010 has a newer DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate and texture rate?

A: The R9 M360 has a pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 29.60 GTexel/s. The GT 1010 has a pixel rate of 11.74 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 23.49 GTexel/s. The R9 M360 is ahead in both measures.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification recorded in the database. The AMD Radeon R9 M360 uses a Tropo chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 uses a GP108 chip with Pascal architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at Samsung, with 1,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The GT 1010 packs more transistors into a smaller die, yielding a transistor density of 24.3M per mm² versus 12.2M per mm² for the R9 M360.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The R9 M360 runs at a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 925 MHz, with memory clocked at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). The GT 1010 runs at a base clock of 1228 MHz and a boost clock of 1468 MHz, with memory clocked at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective). The GT 1010 has much higher core clocks and faster memory clocks, but that does not overcome the R9 M360's other advantages.

Memory configuration also differs. The R9 M360 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The GT 1010 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, with 48.06 GB/s bandwidth. The R9 M360 has twice the memory capacity and significantly more bandwidth.

Compute resources are unevenly distributed. The R9 M360 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The GT 1010 has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The R9 M360 has exactly double the shading units, TMUs, and ROPs of the GT 1010. This explains the R9 M360's higher pixel rate (14.80 GPixel/s vs 11.74 GPixel/s) and texture rate (29.60 GTexel/s vs 23.49 GTexel/s), as well as its higher FP32 throughput (947.2 GFLOPS vs 751.6 GFLOPS).

The GT 1010 has a listed TDP of 30 W, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 200 W. It measures 147 mm (5.8 inches) in length. The R9 M360 has no TDP, slot width, power connector, or dimension data listed in the database. The GT 1010's bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x4, while the R9 M360 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are listed only for the GT 1010: one DVI and one mini-HDMI 2.0. Release dates differ by nearly six years: the R9 M360 launched in May 2015, the GT 1010 in January 2021.

Architecture Differences

The architecture gap is significant. The AMD Radeon R9 M360 is built on GCN 1.0, AMD's first-generation Graphics Core Next design, produced on a 28 nm process. It uses a Tropo chip with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 is built on Pascal, NVIDIA's 2016-era architecture, produced on a 14 nm process by Samsung. It uses a GP108 chip with 1,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The GT 1010's process node is two generations ahead, and its transistor density (24.3M per mm²) is roughly double that of the R9 M360 (12.2M per mm²).

In terms of feature support, the GT 1010 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the R9 M360 supports DirectX 12 (11_1). The GT 1010 also supports Vulkan 1.4, compared to Vulkan 1.2.170 for the R9 M360. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores listed in the database, so those features are absent on both.

The memory architecture is also fundamentally different. The R9 M360 uses a 128-bit memory bus with 4 GB of GDDR5, while the GT 1010 uses a 64-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5. The R9 M360's memory bandwidth of 72.00 GB/s is 50% higher than the GT 1010's 48.06 GB/s, despite the GT 1010 having a faster effective memory clock (6 Gbps vs 4.5 Gbps). The wider bus on the R9 M360 compensates for its slower memory clock.

The compute resource allocation reflects the architectural philosophy of each manufacturer. The R9 M360 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, giving it a pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 29.60 GTexel/s. The GT 1010 has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 11.74 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 23.49 GTexel/s. The R9 M360 has double the raw compute units, but the GT 1010's higher clocks (1228 MHz base, 1468 MHz boost) narrow the gap in FP32 throughput: 947.2 GFLOPS for the R9 M360 versus 751.6 GFLOPS for the GT 1010. The R9 M360 still leads, but by a smaller margin than the unit counts suggest.

The GT 1010 is also a physically different product. It is a single-slot card with no power connectors, a 30 W TDP, a 200 W suggested PSU, and a length of 147 mm. The R9 M360 has none of these details recorded, but its 28 nm GCN 1.0 architecture and 1,500 million transistor count imply a larger, hotter, and more power-hungry design. The GT 1010's PCIe 3.0 x4 interface is narrower than the R9 M360's PCIe 3.0 x16, but for a 30 W card, the x4 interface is likely sufficient.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R9 M360 wins in raw performance. Its OpenCL score of 8,211 beats the GT 1010's 6,698 by 22.6%, and its average benchmark score of 8,129 places it in the 42nd percentile versus the GT 1010's 38th. It has double the shading units, TMUs, ROPs, memory capacity, and memory bus width. It has higher pixel rate (14.80 vs 11.74 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (29.60 vs 23.49 GTexel/s), and higher FP32 (947.2 vs 751.6 GFLOPS). For any workload that scales with compute units, memory bandwidth, or raw throughput, the R9 M360 is the better choice. This includes OpenCL compute tasks, older DirectX 11 games, and applications that benefit from a wider memory bus.

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 wins in efficiency and practicality. It has a 14 nm process node versus 28 nm, a 30 W TDP, no power connectors, a single-slot form factor, and a 147 mm length. It runs on a PCIe 3.0 x4 interface, which is sufficient for its power class. It supports newer API versions: DirectX 12 (12_1) versus 11_1, and Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170. For a compact, low-power build such as an HTPC or a basic office machine, the GT 1010 is the more sensible option. Its higher clock speeds (1228 MHz base, 1468 MHz boost) also mean it will boost aggressively when power and thermals allow, which can help in lightly threaded or memory-limited scenarios.

The GT 1010 also wins on release date and platform support. It launched in January 2021, while the R9 M360 launched in May 2015. The GT 1010's successor is listed as GeForce 20, while the R9 M360's successor is Polaris Mobile. If driver longevity or modern OS support is a concern, the newer card is likely to have a longer support window, though the database does not list driver details.

For gaming, the data is limited. There are no gaming benchmarks in the database, only Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan results. The R9 M360's Vulkan score of 8,047 is recorded, but there is no GT 1010 Vulkan score to compare. Based on the OpenCL delta and the compute resource disparity, the R9 M360 is likely the faster gaming card in most titles, especially those that use DirectX 11 or older APIs. The GT 1010's newer DirectX 12 (12_1) support could give it an edge in titles that heavily use DirectX 12 features, but the R9 M360's 22.6% compute lead suggests it will still win in most scenarios.

The practical verdict is a split. Choose the R9 M360 for performance, memory capacity, and bandwidth. Choose the GT 1010 for power efficiency, size, silence, and modern API support. Neither card is a high-end part, but they serve different niches within the low-end mobile and desktop space.