Arc A370M vs Radeon R7 360

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 360 with Arc A370M, including specs and performance data.

R7 360
2015
2 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
8.06

Arc A370M outperforms R7 360 by an impressive 65% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking514383
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.10no data
Power efficiency5.6226.41
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameTobagoDG2-128
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (9 years ago)30 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores7681024
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1550 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate50.4099.20
Floating-point processing power1.613 TFLOPS3.174 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs4864
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length165 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno data
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed6000 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth112 GB/s112.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan+1.3
Mantle+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R7 360 8.06
Arc A370M 13.26
+64.5%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R7 360 3108
Arc A370M 5115
+64.6%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R7 360 4110
Arc A370M 8149
+98.3%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD21−24
−85.7%
39
+85.7%
1440p12−14
−75%
21
+75%
4K18−21
−88.9%
34
+88.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.19no data
1440p9.08no data
4K6.06no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 46
+0%
46
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 33
+0%
33
+0%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 37
+0%
37
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Hitman 3 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20
+0%
20
+0%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
+0%
25
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Hitman 3 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 62
+0%
62
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18
+0%
18
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21
+0%
21
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Hitman 3 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 53
+0%
53
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 26
+0%
26
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 15
+0%
15
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+0%
13
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 37
+0%
37
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

This is how R7 360 and Arc A370M compete in popular games:

  • Arc A370M is 86% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A370M is 75% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A370M is 89% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.06 13.26
Recency 18 June 2015 30 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 35 Watt

Arc A370M has a 64.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 185.7% lower power consumption.

The Arc A370M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 360 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 360 is a desktop card while Arc A370M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R7 360
Radeon R7 360
Intel Arc A370M
Arc A370M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 659 votes

Rate Radeon R7 360 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 163 votes

Rate Arc A370M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.