AMD Radeon R9 M360 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 and the AMD Radeon R9 M360 represent two very different moments in GPU design. The GTX 560, built on Fermi 2.0 architecture, was a desktop part from 2011 aimed at high-refresh 1080p gaming. The R9 M360, a mobile-oriented chip from 2015, belongs to the GCN 1.0 family and targets laptop graphics. Their paths cross in the database primarily through one recorded OpenCL benchmark, where the older NVIDIA card posts a higher score. However, the full picture involves memory capacity, compute feature sets, and architectural trade-offs that go beyond a single number.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this workload, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 scores 9,058 points, while the AMD Radeon R9 M360 scores 8,211 points. The resulting delta is 10.3% in favor of the GTX 560. This is a meaningful gap, though not a dominant one. It suggests that for general-purpose compute tasks that scale well with raw shading throughput, the older desktop card retains an edge.

Context from the nearest rivals helps interpret this margin. The GTX 560 sits within a cluster of GPUs scoring between 8,918 and 9,210 points. Its immediate neighbors include the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition at 9,037 (0.2% behind the GTX 560), the GeForce GTX 660 at 9,022 (0.4% behind), and the AMD Radeon 550X at 8,918 (1.6% behind). On the other side, the AMD Radeon 890M scores 9,210, which is 1.7% higher than the GTX 560. This means the GTX 560 is effectively in the middle of a tight performance band, with no rival more than 1.7% away in either direction. The 10.3% lead over the R9 M360, therefore, is larger than the spread between the GTX 560 and its closest competitors.

For the R9 M360, its OpenCL score of 8,211 places it near the GeForce GTX 950M, which scores 8,135 (0.1% below the R9 M360). The GeForce 945M trails by 0.4% at 8,099, while the GRID K2 is 0.6% behind at 8,080. The GeForce GTX 980, despite being a much higher-end part, scores 8,167, which is 0.5% lower than the R9 M360. This shows that the R9 M360, while behind the GTX 560 by 10.3%, is well-aligned with a group of mainstream-to-midrange GPUs from the same era. Its percentile ranking of 42 versus the GTX 560's 45 also reflects this: both cards sit in the lower half of all recorded GPUs, but the GTX 560 sits three percentile points higher.

The database also records a Vulkan benchmark for the R9 M360, with a score of 8,047. There is no Vulkan score for the GTX 560, so this cannot be used for a direct head-to-head comparison. However, it is worth remembering the R9 M360's Vulkan result is close to its OpenCL result, indicating consistent compute performance across different APIs. The absence of a Vulkan score for the GTX 560 means its OpenCL result is the only recorded data point, and the head-to-head comparison rests entirely on that single test.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 scores 9,058 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon R9 M360 scores 8,211. The GTX 560 leads by 10.3%.

Q: How does the GTX 560 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The GTX 560 sits between the AMD Radeon 890M (9,210, 1.7% higher) and the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition (9,037, 0.2% lower). It is 0.4% ahead of the GeForce GTX 660 and 1.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon 550X.

Q: What is the R9 M360's position among its nearest competitors?

A: The R9 M360 scores 8,211, which is 0.1% higher than the GeForce GTX 950M (8,135) and 0.4% higher than the GeForce 945M (8,099). It is 0.5% lower than the GeForce GTX 980 (8,167) and 0.6% higher than the GRID K2 (8,080).

Q: Does the R9 M360 have any benchmark advantage over the GTX 560?

A: The R9 M360 has a recorded Vulkan score of 8,047, while the GTX 560 has no Vulkan data in the database. For OpenCL, the R9 M360 trails by 10.3%. No benchmark in the database shows the R9 M360 ahead of the GTX 560.

Q: What are the percentile rankings for these two GPUs?

A: The GTX 560 ranks in the 45th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the R9 M360 ranks in the 42nd percentile. The GTX 560 sits three percentile points higher.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The GTX 560 has 1,024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The R9 M360 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The R9 M360 has four times the capacity but 43.75% less bandwidth.

The Verdict

Based on the recorded data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 is the stronger performer in compute workloads. Its OpenCL score of 9,058 beats the R9 M360's 8,211 by 10.3%, and its 45th percentile ranking is higher than the R9 M360's 42nd percentile. For users running OpenCL-based applications, the GTX 560 delivers a clear, measurable advantage.

However, the choice is not purely about raw compute. The R9 M360 offers 4 GB of memory, which is four times the GTX 560's 1,024 MB. In workloads where memory capacity matters more than bandwidth, such as holding larger datasets or textures, the R9 M360 may be more practical. The GTX 560 counters with 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 77.8% higher than the R9 M360's 72.00 GB/s, making it better suited for memory-bandwidth-sensitive tasks.

For gaming, the GTX 560's higher pixel rate (11.34 GPixel/s vs. 14.80 GPixel/s) and texture rate (45.36 GTexel/s vs. 29.60 GTexel/s) present a mixed picture. The R9 M360 has a higher pixel rate by 30.5%, while the GTX 560 has a higher texture rate by 53.2%. The GTX 560 also has more TMUs (56 vs. 32) and ROPs (32 vs. 16), which could favor traditional rasterization. But the R9 M360 has more shading units (512 vs. 336) and a higher boost clock (925 MHz vs. no recorded base/boost for the GTX 560, which lists only a memory clock of 1,000 MHz or 4 Gbps effective).

The verdict depends on the use case. The GTX 560 wins on compute performance, bandwidth, and texture throughput. The R9 M360 wins on memory capacity, pixel rate, and API support (including Vulkan). The data does not show the R9 M360 winning any benchmark, but its memory capacity and newer architecture (GCN 1.0 vs. Fermi 2.0) mean it is not strictly obsolete.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every key specification. The GTX 560 uses 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, while the R9 M360 uses 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The GTX 560 has a larger die but lower transistor density (5.9M per mm² vs. 12.2M per mm²). The process node differs: the GTX 560 is on 40 nm, the R9 M360 on 28 nm, both from TSMC.

Memory capacity is a major split: the GTX 560 has 1,024 MB, the R9 M360 has 4 GB. Bus width goes from 256-bit on the GTX 560 to 128-bit on the R9 M360. Bandwidth drops from 128.0 GB/s to 72.00 GB/s. The memory clock is listed as 1,000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for the GTX 560, while the R9 M360 has a 1,125 MHz memory clock (4.5 Gbps effective).

Shading units favor the R9 M360 (512 vs. 336), but TMUs and ROPs favor the GTX 560 (56 vs. 32 and 32 vs. 16, respectively). The pixel rate is higher on the R9 M360 (14.80 GPixel/s vs. 11.34 GPixel/s), while the texture rate is higher on the GTX 560 (45.36 GTexel/s vs. 29.60 GTexel/s). FP32 compute is higher on the GTX 560 (1,088.6 GFLOPS vs. 947.2 GFLOPS).

The GTX 560 has a base clock of null (not recorded), a memory clock of 1,000 MHz, and a TDP of 150 W with a dual-slot cooler and two 6-pin power connectors. The R9 M360 has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 925 MHz, with no TDP, slot width, or power connector data recorded. The GTX 560 uses PCIe 2.0 x16, the R9 M360 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are listed only for the GTX 560 (2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a), while the R9 M360 has no display output data.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 560 is built on Fermi 2.0 architecture, using the GF114 chip, and belongs to the GeForce 500 generation. The R9 M360 uses GCN 1.0 architecture, with the Tropo chip, and is part of the Gem System (R9 M300) generation. The GTX 560 is a desktop part with a launch MSRP of 199 USD, while the R9 M360 has no recorded launch MSRP and is mobile-oriented.

Transistor counts differ: 1,950 million for the GTX 560, 1,500 million for the R9 M360. The die size difference is stark: 332 mm² for the GTX 560 versus 123 mm² for the R9 M360. This means the R9 M360 packs more transistors per area (12.2M per mm²) than the GTX 560 (5.9M per mm²), reflecting the newer 28 nm process.

The GTX 560 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan support listed. The R9 M360 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. This gives the R9 M360 an API advantage, especially for Vulkan-based applications. Neither GPU has ray tracing or tensor cores.

The GTX 560's predecessor is the GeForce 400 series, and its successor is the GeForce 600 series. The R9 M360's predecessor is the Solar System generation, and its successor is Polaris Mobile. Both are marked as end-of-life in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 wins in compute performance. Its OpenCL score is 10.3% higher, its FP32 throughput is 1,088.6 GFLOPS compared to 947.2 GFLOPS, and its bandwidth is 128.0 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s. For texture-heavy workloads, the GTX 560's 45.36 GTexel/s rate and 56 TMUs give it a clear edge. Its 32 ROPs and 256-bit bus also favor high-resolution rendering with heavy memory pressure. The GTX 560 is the choice for OpenCL compute, texture-bound tasks, and scenarios where bandwidth is the bottleneck.

The AMD Radeon R9 M360 wins on memory capacity, offering 4 GB versus 1,024 MB. This is a fourfold difference, which matters for applications that load large textures or datasets that cannot fit in 1 GB. The R9 M360 also has a higher pixel rate (14.80 GPixel/s vs. 11.34 GPixel/s), meaning it can fill more pixels per second. Its 512 shading units and boost clock of 925 MHz provide more raw shader count, even if FP32 is lower overall. The R9 M360 also supports Vulkan 1.2.170, which the GTX 560 does not, making it more compatible with modern Vulkan-based games and compute APIs.

In gaming, the GTX 560's higher texture rate and bandwidth could help in games that stream textures heavily. The R9 M360's larger memory pool could help in games with high-resolution texture packs that exceed 1 GB. The R9 M360's PCIe 3.0 interface is also newer than the GTX 560's PCIe 2.0, though the practical impact depends on the system.

For users prioritizing compute benchmarks, the GTX 560 is ahead. For users needing more memory for large datasets or preferring Vulkan support, the R9 M360 is a better fit. The data shows no benchmark where the R9 M360 beats the GTX 560, but its capacity and API features make it a viable alternative in specific scenarios.