Radeon Vega 8 Efficient vs R7 M360

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking979not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameMesoRaven
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)23 April 2018 (6 years ago)

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 cores384512
Compute units6no data
Core clock speed1100 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1125 MHz1100 MHz
Number of transistors1,550 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data35 Watt
Texture fill rate27.0035.20
Floating-point processing power0.864 TFLOPS1.126 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs2432

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 x8IGP
Widthno dataIGP
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/sno data
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.06.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed2.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
Mantle+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 5 May 2015 23 April 2018
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm

Vega 8 Efficient has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 M360 and Radeon Vega 8 Efficient. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R7 M360 is a notebook card while Radeon Vega 8 Efficient is a desktop 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 M360
Radeon R7 M360
AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient
Radeon Vega 8 Efficient

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.


3.2 196 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M360 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 53 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 8 Efficient 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.