AMD Radeon R9 M360 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360 leads with an average score of 8129, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M trails at 7023. The AMD part also holds a higher percentile ranking at 42 versus the NVIDIA card's 39.

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

A: The R9 M360 sits within 0.6% of its closest competitors. It is 0.1% behind the GeForce GTX 950M (8135), 0.4% ahead of the GeForce 945M (8099), 0.5% behind the GeForce GTX 980 (8167), and 0.6% ahead of the GRID K2 (8080). These are extremely tight margins.

Q: What about the GTX 680M's competitive positioning?

A: The GTX 680M's nearest rivals show a wider spread. It is 0.2% behind the NVIDIA T600 (7035), 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon R5 M240 (6975), 1.1% ahead of the GeForce GTX 675M (6946), and 1.9% behind the GeForce GTX 970 (7157).

Q: Which GPU wins in the direct OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M wins the geekbench_opencl test with a score of 9230, defeating the AMD Radeon R9 M360's 8211. The delta is 11% in NVIDIA's favor.

Q: Do the two GPUs support different graphics APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6. The R9 M360 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GTX 680M supports the slightly newer Vulkan 1.2.175. The AMD card lists DirectX 12 (11_1), while the NVIDIA card lists DirectX 12 (11_0).

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The GTX 680M offers 115.2 GB/s bandwidth over a 256-bit bus, while the R9 M360 provides 72.00 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. The NVIDIA card's memory clock runs at 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective), while the AMD card's memory runs at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective).

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split: the AMD Radeon R9 M360 is the better overall performer in average benchmark scores, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M dominates the single head-to-head OpenCL test. For users prioritizing raw compute in OpenCL, the GTX 680M is the obvious pick, as its 9230 score versus 8211 represents a decisive 11% advantage. However, for those looking at the broader average across tests, the R9 M360's 8129 average versus 7023 means AMD's card is roughly 16% ahead in aggregate performance.

The GTX 680M offers substantially higher theoretical throughput: 2.038 TFLOPS FP32, 84.90 GTexel/s texture rate, and 21.22 GPixel/s pixel rate, compared to the R9 M360's 947.2 GFLOPS, 29.60 GTexel/s, and 14.80 GPixel/s. Yet these raw specifications do not translate into a higher average benchmark score. This discrepancy suggests the R9 M360 benefits from more efficient architecture or better driver optimization in certain workloads.

The GTX 680M also carries a 100 W TDP and comes as an MXM Module with no power connectors, while the R9 M360 has no published TDP. For laptop upgrades where power draw is a concern, the NVIDIA card's documented 100 W figure gives clearer guidance. The R9 M360's unspecified power consumption leaves a gap in the analysis.

Overall, the verdict depends on the workload. For OpenCL compute tasks, the GTX 680M wins outright. For a balanced assessment across multiple benchmarks, the R9 M360's higher average and better percentile ranking make it the safer choice. The GTX 680M's age (released June 2012) versus the R9 M360's May 2015 release date also matters, as the newer AMD card benefits from three additional years of driver refinements.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the database is the geekbench_opencl test, and it clearly favors NVIDIA. The GTX 680M scores 9230, while the R9 M360 scores 8211, producing a delta of 11%. This is not a marginal difference; it is a substantial gap that indicates the NVIDIA card handles OpenCL workloads with significantly higher efficiency.

Given the theoretical specifications, this result makes sense. The GTX 680M has 1344 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, versus the R9 M360's 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The NVIDIA card also has more than twice the memory bandwidth (115.2 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s) and a wider 256-bit bus. These hardware advantages likely explain the OpenCL victory.

However, the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The R9 M360's 8129 average is based on two tests (geekbench_opencl at 8211 and geekbench_vulkan at 8047), while the GTX 680M's 7023 average is based on two tests (geekbench_metal at 4815 and geekbench_opencl at 9230). The GTX 680M's poor Metal score drags its average down significantly, despite winning the OpenCL test.

This creates an interesting dynamic. If the workload is OpenCL-specific, the GTX 680M is superior by 11%. If the workload involves Metal on Apple platforms, the R9 M360 has no recorded Metal score, but the GTX 680M's 4815 Metal score is notably low. The R9 M360's Vulkan score of 8047 suggests it handles modern cross-platform APIs well.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every hardware specification. The R9 M360 uses 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, while the GTX 680M uses 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. Transistor density is nearly identical at 12.2M per mm² for AMD and 12.0M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds favor AMD. The R9 M360 runs at a 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost, while the GTX 680M runs at 719 MHz base and 758 MHz boost. The AMD card's higher clocks partially compensate for its fewer execution units.

Memory configurations differ significantly. Both have 4 GB of GDDR5, but the GTX 680M uses a 256-bit bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the R9 M360 uses a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s. The AMD card's memory runs faster in effective terms (4.5 Gbps versus 3.6 Gbps), but the narrower bus limits total bandwidth.

The GTX 680M has a documented TDP of 100 W, while the R9 M360 has no listed TDP. The NVIDIA card comes as an MXM Module with a PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface via MXM-B, while the R9 M360 uses a standard PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. Display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent" for NVIDIA, while AMD's are unspecified.

The GTX 680M supports Vulkan 1.2.175, slightly newer than the R9 M360's 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. DirectX support differs: AMD lists 12 (11_1), while NVIDIA lists 12 (11_0).

Architecture Differences

The R9 M360 uses the Tropo chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, belonging to the Gem System generation (R9 M300 series). The GTX 680M uses the GK104 chip based on Kepler architecture, from the GeForce 600M generation. Both are built on a 28 nm process at TSMC.

The AMD architecture packs 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The NVIDIA architecture offers 1344 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This gives the GTX 680M more than double the shading units and over three times the texture units. However, the R9 M360's higher clock speeds (925 MHz boost versus 758 MHz) narrow the performance gap.

Transistor counts reveal different design philosophies. The GTX 680M's 3,540 million transistors on 294 mm² is a large, complex chip. The R9 M360's 1,500 million transistors on 123 mm² is a smaller, more efficient design. Both achieve similar transistor density, suggesting comparable manufacturing maturity.

The GTX 680M has no power connectors and relies on a 100 W TDP, indicating it was designed for laptop MXM slots with dedicated power delivery. The R9 M360's power characteristics are undocumented, leaving questions about its thermal and power requirements.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M wins in: OpenCL compute workloads, where its 9230 score beats the R9 M360's 8211 by 11%. Its higher shading unit count (1344 versus 512), greater memory bandwidth (115.2 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s), and larger texture throughput (84.90 GTexel/s versus 29.60 GTexel/s) make it suited for compute-heavy and texture-intensive tasks. The card's documented 100 W TDP and MXM form factor make it a known quantity for system integration.

AMD Radeon R9 M360 wins in: Overall average benchmark performance, with an 8129 average versus 7023. Its higher percentile ranking (42 versus 39) indicates better standing among all GPUs. The newer release date (May 2015 versus June 2012) means it benefits from more recent driver development. Its Vulkan score of 8047 demonstrates strong modern API performance, while the GTX 680M has no recorded Vulkan score. For users who value balanced performance across multiple test scenarios rather than a single compute benchmark, the R9 M360 is the better choice.

The R9 M360's higher clock speeds (925 MHz boost versus 758 MHz) and newer architecture suggest better efficiency in the tasks it can handle. However, the GTX 680M's massive hardware advantage in raw resources makes it the clear winner for demanding compute workloads. The choice ultimately depends on whether the user prioritizes the single OpenCL test or the aggregate average.