AMD Radeon R9 M360 vs NVIDIA Quadro 5000 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon R9 M360 is the faster card in raw compute performance. Its average benchmark score of 8129 places it 12.6% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro 5000's 7289 in the only direct head-to-head OpenCL test. The R9 M360 also sits in a higher overall GPU percentile (42nd vs 40th), meaning it outperforms a larger share of all recorded GPUs.

The Quadro 5000, however, is the card for professional workstation use. It carries a 2,499 USD launch MSRP, dual-slot design, 1x 6-pin power connector, and 450 W suggested PSU, all pointing to a card built for sustained professional workloads rather than consumer gaming. Its 2.5 GB memory with a 320-bit bus delivers 120.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is 66.7% higher than the R9 M360's 72.00 GB/s, a critical advantage for large datasets.

Pick the R9 M360 if you need general compute performance, modern API support including Vulkan, and a more transistor-dense design. Pick the Quadro 5000 if you need memory bandwidth, professional display outputs (1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort), and a card that fits into an existing workstation power envelope with a known 152 W TDP.

Where Each One Wins

The R9 M360 wins on computational throughput. Its 947.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance is 31.1% higher than the Quadro 5000's 722.3 GFLOPS. It also has more shading units (512 vs 352) and a higher pixel rate (14.80 GPixel/s vs 11.29 GPixel/s). The texture rate of 29.60 GTexel/s beats the Quadro's 22.57 GTexel/s by 31.1%. In the only recorded head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, the R9 M360 scores 8211 versus 7289, a 12.6% advantage.

The Quadro 5000 wins on memory throughput and capacity. Its 120.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 72.00 GB/s is a 66.7% advantage. It has 2.5 GB of GDDR5 versus 4 GB, so the R9 M360 has more capacity, but the Quadro's 320-bit bus versus 128-bit gives it substantially more bandwidth. The Quadro also has more texture mapping units (44 vs 32) and more raster output units (40 vs 16). Its 40 ROPs give it a 2.5x advantage over the R9 M360's 16 ROPs, which matters for fill-rate-bound scenarios.

The R9 M360 wins on API support. It supports Vulkan 1.2.170, which the Quadro 5000 does not support at all. Both support DirectX 12 (the R9 M360 at 11_1 feature level, the Quadro at 11_0) and OpenGL 4.6.

Architecture Differences

The R9 M360 uses AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture on the Tropo chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,500 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.2M per mm². The Quadro 5000 uses NVIDIA's Fermi architecture on the GF100 chip, also fabricated at TSMC but on a 40 nm process. It contains 3,100 million transistors across a 529 mm² die, for a density of 5.9M per mm². The R9 M360 is more than twice as dense per square millimeter.

The R9 M360 is part of AMD's Gem System R9 M300 generation and succeeds the Solar System line, with Polaris Mobile as its successor. The Quadro 5000 belongs to the Quadro Fermi x000 generation, succeeding Quadro FX Tesla and followed by Quadro Kepler.

Clock behavior differs significantly. The R9 M360 has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 925 MHz. The Quadro 5000 has no recorded base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective). The R9 M360's memory runs at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). The R9 M360 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the Quadro 5000 uses PCIe 2.0 x16, giving the newer card double the per-lane bandwidth.

Both cards are end-of-life products. The R9 M360 was released on 2015-05-04, while the Quadro 5000 came out on 2011-02-22, making the AMD card over four years newer.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in raw compute?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M360. It scores 8211 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 7289 for the Quadro 5000, a 12.6% lead. Its FP32 throughput of 947.2 GFLOPS is 31.1% higher than the Quadro's 722.3 GFLOPS.

Q: Does the Quadro 5000 have any advantages?

A: Yes. It has 120.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus 72.00 GB/s, a 66.7% advantage. It also has 40 ROPs versus 16, and 44 TMUs versus 32. Its 2.5 GB frame buffer uses a 320-bit bus, which is much wider than the R9 M360's 128-bit bus.

Q: Which card supports Vulkan?

A: Only the AMD Radeon R9 M360. It supports Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has no Vulkan support recorded. Both cards support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What are the physical differences?

A: The Quadro 5000 is a dual-slot card with a 248 mm length and 111 mm height, requiring a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 450 W suggested PSU. It has a recorded TDP of 152 W. The R9 M360 has no recorded TDP, slot width, power connector, or dimension data.

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

A: The R9 M360's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, which scores 8135, just 0.1% higher. The Quadro 5000's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 at 7222, which is 0.9% lower. The R9 M360 sits between the GTX 950M and GTX 980 in average score.

Q: Which card has more transistors?

A: The Quadro 5000 has 3,100 million transistors versus 1,500 million for the R9 M360. However, the R9 M360 packs them into a 123 mm² die versus 529 mm², giving it a 12.2M per mm² density versus 5.9M per mm².

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon R9 M360 scores 8211, while the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 scores 7289. The AMD card wins by 12.6%. This aligns with the compute specifications, where the R9 M360's 947.2 GFLOPS FP32 outpaces the Quadro's 722.3 GFLOPS.

The practical interpretation: the R9 M360 completes OpenCL workloads about an eighth faster. In rendering, physics, or compute tasks that use OpenCL, the R9 M360 will finish sooner. The Quadro 5000's advantage does not appear in this benchmark because Geekbench OpenCL does not heavily stress memory bandwidth. The Quadro's 120.0 GB/s bandwidth and 40 ROPs would matter more in memory-bound or fill-rate-bound workloads, but the recorded data only covers compute throughput.

Looking at rival positioning, the R9 M360's 8129 average score puts it 0.1% behind the GTX 950M (8135) and 0.5% behind the GTX 980 (8167). The Quadro 5000's 7289 average sits 1.7% above the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 (7170) and 1.6% above the GTX 560 SE (7171). The R9 M360 competes in a higher performance tier overall.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R9 M360 | NVIDIA Quadro 5000 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi |

| Process node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 3,100 million |

| Die size | 123 mm² | 529 mm² |

| Transistor density | 12.2M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Base clock | 900 MHz | Not recorded |

| Boost clock | 925 MHz | Not recorded |

| Memory clock | 1125 MHz, 4.5 Gbps effective | 750 MHz, 3 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 2.5 GB |

| Memory bus | 128 bit | 320 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 72.00 GB/s | 120.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 512 | 352 |

| TMUs | 32 | 44 |

| ROPs | 16 | 40 |

| Pixel rate | 14.80 GPixel/s | 11.29 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 29.60 GTexel/s | 22.57 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 947.2 GFLOPS | 722.3 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not recorded | 152 W |

| Slot width | Not recorded | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | Not recorded | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not recorded | 450 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | Not recorded | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | Not recorded |

| Release date | 2015-05-04 | 2011-02-22 |

The R9 M360 is the smaller, denser, faster-compute card with more memory capacity and modern API support. The Quadro 5000 is the larger, higher-bandwidth, fill-rate-oriented card with professional display outputs and a known power profile. The R9 M360's 16 ROPs versus 40 is the most striking disparity in favor of the Quadro, while the 947.2 GFLOPS versus 722.3 GFLOPS is the most striking disparity in favor of the R9 M360.