Radeon RX 560X Mobile vs R7 360

Place in the ranking	516	426
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	4.33	no data
Power efficiency	5.60	11.46
Architecture	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	Tobago	Polaris 21
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	18 June 2015 (9 years ago)	11 April 2018 (6 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 cores	768	1024
Core clock speed	no data	1275 MHz
Boost clock speed	1000 MHz	1202 MHz
Number of transistors	2,080 million	3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	65 Watt
Texture fill rate	50.40	81.60
Floating-point processing power	1.613 TFLOPS	2.611 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	48	64

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).

Laptop size	no data	large
Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Length	165 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1 x 6-pin	no 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	6000 MHz	1450 MHz
Memory bandwidth	112 GB/s	92.8 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	No outputs
Eyefinity	+	-
Number of Eyefinity displays	6	no 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.

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	6.3	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.0
Vulkan	+	1.2.131
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 8.13

RX 560X Mobile 10.82
+33.1%

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

RX 560X Mobile 6329
+54%

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 HD

24−27

−41.7%

34
+41.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

4.54

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18 +0%	18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	23 +0%	23 +0%
Elden Ring	31 +0%	31 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	35 +0%	35 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	15 +0%	15 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18 +0%	18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	51 +0%	51 +0%
Metro Exodus	39 +0%	39 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	47 +0%	47 +0%
Valorant	50 +0%	50 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	44 +0%	44 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	15 +0%	15 +0%
Dota 2	47 +0%	47 +0%
Elden Ring	28 +0%	28 +0%
Far Cry 5	28 +0%	28 +0%
Fortnite	50 +0%	50 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	42 +0%	42 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	36 +0%	36 +0%
Metro Exodus	26 +0%	26 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	101 +0%	101 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Valorant	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
World of Tanks	122 +0%	122 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	31 +0%	31 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7 +0%	7 +0%
Dota 2	66 +0%	66 +0%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	37 +0%	37 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	29 +0%	29 +0%
Valorant	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Elden Ring	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
World of Tanks	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Valorant	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Elden Ring	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Fortnite	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%

This is how R7 360 and RX 560X Mobile compete in popular games:

RX 560X Mobile is 42% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.13	10.82
Recency	18 June 2015	11 April 2018
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	65 Watt

RX 560X Mobile has a 33.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 53.8% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 560X Mobile 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 Radeon RX 560X Mobile is a notebook one.

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