Radeon RX 590 vs R7 360

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon R7 360 Radeon R7 360 896SP Radeon R7 360E Radeon R9 360 OEM Radeon RX 455 OEM
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon RX 550 Radeon RX 550X Radeon RX 560 Radeon RX 560 XT Radeon RX 560X Radeon RX 570 Radeon RX 570X Radeon RX 580 Radeon RX 580 2048SP Radeon RX 580 OEM Radeon RX 580X Radeon RX 590 Radeon RX 590 GME

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 360 and Radeon RX 590, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 360
2015
2 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
8.14

RX 590 outperforms R7 360 by a whopping 199% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

R7 360 R7 360
RX 590 RX 590

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking523237
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.4324.33
Power efficiency5.609.57
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameTobagoPolaris 30
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (9 years ago)15 November 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 $279

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

RX 590 has 449% better value for money than R7 360.

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 cores7682304
Core clock speedno data1469 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1545 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate50.40222.5
Floating-point processing power1.613 TFLOPS7.119 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs48144

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 3.0 x16
Length165 mm241 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin1x 8-pin
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed6000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth112 GB/s256.0 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 DisplayPort1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_0)
Shader Model6.36.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
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.

R7 360 8.14
RX 590 24.35
+199%

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 3137
RX 590 9382
+199%

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 590 16814
+309%

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 HD35−40
−200%
105
+200%
1440p21−24
−205%
64
+205%
4K12−14
−225%
39
+225%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.11
−17.2%
2.66
+17.2%
1440p5.19
−19.1%
4.36
+19.1%
4K9.08
−27%
7.15
+27%
  • RX 590 has 17% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 590 has 19% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 590 has 27% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Battlefield 5 133
+0%
133
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 85
+0%
85
+0%
Fortnite 139
+0%
139
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120
+0%
120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120
+0%
120
+0%
Valorant 301
+0%
301
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Battlefield 5 111
+0%
111
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Dota 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 79
+0%
79
+0%
Fortnite 138
+0%
138
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 113
+0%
113
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 79
+0%
79
+0%
Metro Exodus 52
+0%
52
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 108
+0%
108
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 88
+0%
88
+0%
Valorant 287
+0%
287
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100
+0%
100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Dota 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 74
+0%
74
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 91
+0%
91
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 83
+0%
83
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51
+0%
51
+0%
Valorant 110
+0%
110
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 96
+0%
96
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 31
+0%
31
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 232
+0%
232
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 41
+0%
41
+0%
Metro Exodus 19
+0%
19
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 32
+0%
32
+0%
Valorant 113
+0%
113
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40
+0%
40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 46
+0%
46
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35
+0%
35
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 29
+0%
29
+0%

This is how R7 360 and RX 590 compete in popular games:

  • RX 590 is 200% faster in 1080p
  • RX 590 is 205% faster in 1440p
  • RX 590 is 225% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 8.14 24.35
Recency 18 June 2015 15 November 2018
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 175 Watt

R7 360 has 75% lower power consumption.

RX 590, on the other hand, has a 199.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 590 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 360 in performance tests.

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
AMD Radeon RX 590
Radeon RX 590
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

R7 360 Radeon R7 360
vs
GTX 470 GeForce GTX 470
RX 590 Radeon RX 590
vs
R9 390X Radeon R9 390X
R7 360 Radeon R7 360
vs
RX 560X Radeon RX 560X
GT 1030 DDR4 NVIDIA GT 1030 DDR4
vs
R7 360 360
GTX 1050 3 GB NVIDIA GTX 1050 3 GB
vs
R7 360 360
Vega 3 Embedded AMD Vega 3 Embedded
vs
R7 360 360
RTX 2060 NVIDIA RTX 2060
vs
R7 360 360
RX 580 2048SP AMD RX 580 2048SP
vs
R7 360 360
GeForce MX250 GeForce MX250
vs
R7 360 360
GTX 1650 NVIDIA GTX 1650
vs
R7 360 360
GTX 1660 NVIDIA GTX 1660
vs
R7 360 360
Pro WX 3200 AMD Pro WX 3200
vs
R7 360 360

Community ratings

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

3.8 677 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 2602 votes

Rate Radeon RX 590 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 360 or Radeon RX 590, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.