Amd r7 360

AMD Radeon R7 360

Общая информация
Год выхода2015
Категория видеокартыДесктопная
Тип видеокартыДискретная
ИнтерфейсPCIe 3.0
Максимальное разрешение4096 x 2160
Графический процессор
АрхитектураGCN 1.1
Количество чипов1
Техпроцесс28 nm
Количество транзисторов2080 млн
Площадь160 мм²
Частота ядра1050 MHz
Универсальных шейдерных блоков768
Блоков растеризации (ROP)16
Текстурных блоков (TMU)48
Пиксельная скорость заполнения (pixel fillrate)16.8 GPixel/s
Текстурная скорость заполнения (texel fillrate)50.4 GTexel/s
Объем2048 Mb
Частота6500 MHz
Ширина шины128 bit
Пропускная способность104.0 GB/s
Макс. потребляемая энергия (TDP)100 W
Мин. требования к блоку питания450 W
Разъемы дополнительного питания6-pin
Поддерживаемые API и технологии
Shader Model5.0
Другие технологии• ATI Eyefinity• HDCP• AMD Mantle

• Vulkan API

Сравнить Radeon R7 360 с другой видеокартой

( ~ 600 моделей )

Быстродействие Radeon R7 360

в играх

Рейтинг видеокарт

( + спецификации )

Сервис сравнения процессоров

( ~ 2 600 моделей )

Рейтинг процессоров

( + спецификации )

AMD Radeon R7 360 Graphics Card Review and Benchmarks

Hello everyone. Will here and today, I am going to review an older budget video card. I will be looking at the AMD R7 360 2GB GPU. This is quite a good entry level card, especially if you are into the eSports genre of gaming.

The AMD R7 360 is an entry level budget graphics card that was released in June 2015 for a price of around $110. At the time, it was one of the better, more discrete budget cards on the market. However, today, for $110, I do not feel the card would be a good buy. However, at around $80, it may very well be worth it.

At the core of the R7 360 GPU, you get Tobago architecture but underneath that is the Bonaire GPU used in the older R7 260 and R7 260X. The Bonaire core has 14 compute units with 896 stream processors but AMD has cut those down to 12 units and 768 stream processors in the R7 260; same for the R7 360.

Even though the R7 360 has the same core count, AMD gave the GPU a light boost on the clocks with tweaks across the board. The R7 360 has a revised 1,050MHz core clock which is 50MHz faster than the R7 260 and the 2GB of GDDR5 VRAM is clocked at 6,500MHz which runs 500MHz faster than the 260.

Click thumbnail to view full-size

Now, let’s talk about the benchmarks. I tested this card in 2 setups, one in my i7-7700K test bench, the other in the computer build it was intended for, a Ryzen 3 1200. So, here are the specs for the test systems

1. i7-7700K clocked at 4.7GHz MSI Z270 Tomahawk 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 RAM clocked at 2933MHz (Dual Channel;


2. Ryzen 3 1200 clocked at 3.75GHZ MSI B350 Bazooka

8GB Crucial Ballistix Sport LT clocked at 2667MHz (Dual Channel; 2x4)

Games Benchmarked (1080p, High Settings) - Ryzen 3 1200

1. Battlefield 4 (Min: 26, Avg: 31)2. Batman: Arkham Origins (Min: 42, Avg: 61)3. Bioshock Infinite (Min: 22, Avg: 39)4. Crysis 3 (Min: 11, Avg: 24)5. Metro: Last Light (Min: 14, Avg: 33)6. Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor (Min: 14, Avg: 28)7. Rise of the Tomb Raider (Min: 24, Avg: 49)8. Grand Theft Auto V (Min: 31, Avg: 55)9. Roblox (Min: 58, Avg: 74)

10. Minecraft (Min: 55, Avg: 66)

Games Benchmarked (1080p, High Settings) – Intel Core i7-7700K1. Battlefield 4 (Min: 25, Avg: 37)2. Batman: Arkham Origins (Min: 38, Avg: 65)3. Bioshock Infinite (Min: 16, Avg: 40)4. Crysis 3 (Min: 7, Avg: 26)5. Metro: Last Light (Min: 12, Avg: 36)6. Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor (Min: 13, Avg: 30)7. Rise of the Tomb Raider (Min: 22, Avg: 49)8. Grand Theft Auto V (Min: 30, Avg: 57)9. Roblox (Min: 56, Avg: 75)

10. Minecraft (Min: 53, Avg: 68)

In testing, I had a peak temperature of 68C and peak power consumption of 83w at idle and 171w under load.

The R7 360 is an affordable card for entry level 1080p on eSports games as can bee seen in the results above with Roblox and Minecraft; both games are what the card was intended for in the budget build in which it was placed. The card, even with a budget processor could handle most games I threw at it, even Triple A games, though not all were what I would consider playable experiences. At any rate, this is a great card for entry level builds, budget builds, or budget upgrades to OEM systems, especially at around $70, though, I feel $80 is still a little expensive for the performance. However, I purchased this card from Newegg who had a deal for instant $10 rebate and a$20 mail-in-rebate. So, after all was said and done with rebates, taxes and shipping, I paid $40 for this card which was an amazing deal. If you can snag one of these up new for that, grab it but used, I’d say $30-$35 is a nice price. I can only recommend this card as a fall back or a fill in card for future upgrade at current prices.

AMD Radeon R7 360 Review | Trusted Reviews


  • Page 1 AMD Radeon R7 360 Review
  • Page 2 Benchmarks Review


  • Reasonable 1080p pace
  • Just about beats GTX 750
  • Small, modest design
  • Costs less than £100


  • Outpaced by price-cut GTX 750 Ti
  • Requires a power connector
  • High power consumption

Key Specifications

  • Review Price: £84.00
  • 1,050MHz core clock
  • 2GB 6,500MHz GDDR5 memory
  • 2.08 billion transistors
  • 768 stream processors
  • requires 1 x 6-pin power connector
  • Manufacturer: AMD

The latest graphics card from AMD is the most affordable I’ve seen from its 300-series of parts. At just £84, it costs less than anything that’s recently been released by either AMD or Nvidia.

That makes the R7 360 suitable for gamers wanting to play titles at 1080p, but without forking out more than £100. AMD also says it’s suitable for MOBA players who want to game with settings beyond what any integrated core can offer.

AMD Radeon R7 360 – Under the Hood

This is one of AMD’s cheapest discrete cards, so the firm has recycled and boosted an older part to create the R7 360.

The core used here is called Tobago, but underneath it is the Bonaire GPU used in the older R7 260 and R7 260X cards. The full-fat Bonaire core has 14 compute units with 896 stream processors, which AMD had cut down to 12 units and 768 stream processors for the R7 260. It’s done the same here, with 12 compute units used to form the R7 360.

Round-up: 2015’s Greatest GamesThe core might be the same, but AMD has given the R7 360 a little boost with clock tweaks across the board. The revised 1,050MHz core is 50MHz quicker than last year’s card, and the 2GB of GDDR5 memory runs at 6,500MHz – an improvement of 500MHz on last year.

It’s a modest card, with several board partner versions barely any longer than a PCI Express x16 slot. This makes the R7 360 ideal for smaller cases. In addition, the card requires only one six-pin power connector, which means it’ll be compatible with a greater number of power supplies.

The R7 360 has strong competition, however. Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 750 is available in only a couple of variants but costs a tempting £95. The GeForce GTX 750 Ti has been around longer, which means a bigger selection of cards is available, and its prices start at £90 thanks to a recent price drop from Nvidia.

AMD Radeon R7 360 – Results Analysis

The R7 360 is a budget card designed for 1080p playback and smooth gameplay in less demanding titles. This was seen out in the benchmarks, where it struggled to run some games with smooth frame rates.

In Battlefield 4, its 1080p minimum and average frame rates of 23fps and 28fps are a little below what I’d consider smooth, which means that gameplay will occasionally stutter unless quality settings are dropped. Those minimum and average results were four and two frames better than the GTX 750, but it’s still an inauspicious start – especially when the GTX 750 Ti romped through with an average of 47fps.

Batman: Arkham Origins is a less demanding title, and here the R7 360 improved. Its 1080p average frame rate of 60fps is enough for smooth gameplay, and it divided the two Nvidia cards: the GTX 750 was three frames quicker, but the GTX 750 Ti could manage only 58fps.

Batman is also one of the only games where the R7 360 returned a playable score at 1440p, with an average of 36fps.

The Radeon continued to deliver playable 1080p speeds in BioShock Infinite, where it hit an average of 39fps. That’s good, but it’s unable to match Nvidia: the GTX 750 and GTX 750 Ti hit 41fps and 65fps.

Crysis 3 is a tougher test, so it’s no surprise that the R7 360 struggled. Its 1080p average of 24fps is only one frame behind the GTX 750, and that frame rate isn’t playable.

In Metro: Last Light, the R7 360’s average of 32fps is two frames behind the GTX 750, but the tables were turned in Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor. This was the AMD card’s most convincing victory, with its 29fps average ten frames better than the Nvidia card – but its 15fps minimum also means that it may occasionally stutter when played at its highest settings.

In Tomb Raider, the R7 360’s 49fps average was one frame ahead of the GTX 750; and in Grand Theft Auto V, the AMD card average 56fps – two frames ahead of the Nvidia GPU.

There isn’t a huge gap between the R7 360 and GTX 750 in games benchmarks. The R7 360 and GTX 750 each had better average frame rates in four out of eight games tests. AMD’s card was a little better in minimums, with five victories to the GTX 750’s two, but many of those minimum scores are far below what I’d consider playable – which means games could stutter when run on either card.

Both the R7 360 and GTX 750 are also shown up by the GTX 750 Ti. Its more muscular specification means it’s better in almost every benchmark.

The battles between the cards are summed up by synthetic tests. The R7 360’s 3DMark: Fire Strike score of 3,747 is barely any different from the GTX 750’s result of 3,726, but the GTX 750 Ti trounced both with a result of 4,113. In Unigine Heaven’s 1080p test there was barely a frame to choose between the R7 360 and GTX 750, but the GTX 750 Ti beat them both with 19.4fps.

AMD’s cards don’t usually fare well when compared to Nvidia in temperature and power consumption tests. That’s because AMD’s older, recycled architectures aren’t as power-efficient as the green team’s hardware.

Nothing has changed here. The R7 360’s peak temperature of 69 degrees is a little higher than both Nvidia cards. The AMD card’s idle and peak power consumption figures of 83W and 171W are higher, too: the GTX 750 hit 77W and 123W in those tests, and the GTX 750 Ti topped out at 74W and 169W.

Round-up: 2015’s Top PC Games

Other Things to Consider

The lack of a reference card means that board partners have been busy. Six models are available at the time of writing, with prices ranging between £84 and £96. Most of those are overclocked: the cheapest card costs £84 and adds a modest 10MHz to the core, while an £89 card from Gigabyte ramps the core to a more impressive 1,200MHz.

Those cards are all retail versions, but look out for an OEM model that could appear in pre-built systems. The OEM version of the R7 360 uses the same Bonaire core as the consumer card, but it’s clocked to 1,000MHz rather than 1,050MHz.

There aren’t many GTX 750 variants available right now, but that card has one big advantage over the AMD chip – it doesn’t require any power connectors.

The GTX 750 Ti wins for board partner variation. There are small and large models, many with sizeable overclocks, and a passive model costs £99 – perfect for building a silent gaming PC. The higher power requirement of this card does mean that it requires a six-pin power connector.


The R7 360 is presented as an affordable card for 1080p and MOBA gameplay, and AMD has fulfilled this brief: it played most of the games at 1080p with their highest settings enabled, and wasn’t far from smooth gameplay in other titles. It was marginally better than the GTX 750, which was similarly competent with average frame rates but suffered with poorer minimums.

This may look like a victory for AMD, but the situation isn’t that clear-cut. The price cut to the GTX 750 Ti means that it now costs less than £100, and it’s better than the R7 360 in almost every game, alongside offering m ore board partner variation and better power consumption.

Buy Now: AMD Radeon R7 360 at (£82) | ($99)

The R7 360 is a competent low-end card that’s worth buying ahead of the GTX 750, but the GTX 750 Ti is easily the best option when it comes to graphics cards that cost less than £100.

Itching to play some new games? Then take a look at our verdicts on two of the hottest genres around right now. Here’s what we think of this year’s best FPS titles, and click here for the low-down on the top RPG games.

Mike has worked as a technology journalist for more than a decade, writing for most of the UK’s most well-known websites and magazines. During his time writing about technology he’s developed obsessio…

Unlike other sites, we thoroughly test every product we review. We use industry standard tests in order to compare features properly. We’ll always tell you what we find. We never, ever accept money to review a product. Tell us what you think - send your emails to the Editor.

سعر ومواصفات AMD Radeon R7 360

September 07, 2018 - 1:01 am admin AMD

  • من سلسلة : AMD Radeon 300 .
  • حجم الذاكرة : 2GB جيجا بايت GDDR5 .
  • معمارية الكارت : 128 بت .
  • سعة نقل البيانات : 104 جيجا بايت في الثانية .

سعر ومواصفات كارت الشاشة AMD Radeon R7 360 تقدمه اليكم شركة AMD الامريكية في سلسلة Radeon 300 الذي تم الاعلان عنه في يوم 16 يونيو من عام 2015 ، حيث يأتي بذاكرة عشوائية بسعة 2GB جيجا بايت GDDR5، ويصل سعة نقل البيانات الي 104 جيجا بايت في الثانية و بمعمارية 128 بت ، وبسرعات معالجة Base Clock بسرعة 1050 ميجا هيرتز و Memory Clock بسرعة 1625 ميجا هيرتز ، ويدعم الكارت تقنية AMD CrossFire و AMD HD3D و AMD Mantle و AMD PowerPlay و AMD Zero Core Power و AMD TrueAudio ، وواجهة الكارت PCI-Express 3.0 x16 ، واليكم كافة تفاصيل الكرت .

إمكانيات الكرت
حجم الذاكرة 2GB جيجا بايت GDDR5
سرعات المعالجة Stream Processors :768 Base Clock بسرعة 1050 ميجا هيرتز

Memory Clock بسرعة 1625 ميجا هيرتز

معمارية كرت 128 بت
سعة نقل البيانات 104 جيجا بايت في الثانية
نوع الكرت مكتبي
واجهة الكارت PCI-Express 3.0 x16
تاريخ الإعلان 16 يونيو من عام 2015
دعم التكنولوجيا
الواقع الافتراضي VR Ready لايدعم
اصدار دايركت إكس DirectX 11.2
اصدار OpenGL 4.4
اصدار OpenCL 1.2
اصدار Shader Model 5.0
دعم تكنولوجيا اخري AMD CrossFire و AMD HD3D و AMD Mantle و AMD PowerPlay و AMD Zero Core Power و AMD TrueAudio
دعم الشاشة
منافذ الكرت DVI-I DualLink DVI-D DualLink


دعم الشاشات المتعددة يدعم
المواصفات الحرارية والطاقة
إمداد الطاقة الموصى به 350 وات
في مصر لم يحدد السعر بعد
في السعودية لم يحدد السعر بعد
ملاحظه : قد تختلف مواصفات كارت الشاشة في بعض البلدان العربية عن بعضها لذلك تأكد قبل الشراء ولا نضمن صحة المواصفات بنسبة 100 % في حالة وجود اخطاء اتصل بنا.

AMD Launches Retail Radeon 300 Series: A Prelude To Fury

Launching today is the bulk of the Radeon 300 series, the so-called “numbered” parts like 390, which are categorically distinct from the Fury products. As we mentioned in the introduction, from a volume standpoint these cards are the backbone of AMD’s lineup and will be where the majority of their sales take place. The attention may be on Fiji as AMD’s newest and fastest part, but it’s here where AMD makes the most in sales.

To cut right to the chase then, for better or worse all of the numbered parts – 360, 370, 380, and the 390 series – are refresh products based on existing AMD GPUs. The only new GPU AMD is launching for desktop video cards is Fiji for the Fury parts, which leads us to the current situation.

Since the launch of the original GCN 1.0 cards in 2012, AMD has gone about refreshing their lineup in an unusual piecemeal fashion. All-told AMD has launched three new desktop GPUs in the last two years – Bonaire, Hawaii, and Tonga – and next week Fiji will make number 4. So AMD hasn’t stayed idle since 2012, but because they’re releasing 1-2 GPUs a year each year, they none the less end up releasing refresh products such as is the case with the 300 series.

AMD Radeon Product Evolution
Predecessor GPU Successor
Radeon R9 290X Hawaii Radeon R9 390X
Radeon R9 285 Tonga Radeon R9 380
Radeon R9 265 Radeon HD 7850 Pitcairn Radeon R9 370
Radeon R9 260 Bonaire Radeon R9 360

Along these lines, because AMD is not releasing new GPUs in this range, the company is also forgoing releasing reference cards. Reference cards were built for testing/promotional purposes, but all of the cards being launched today will be fully-custom cards tailored to the 300 series specifications, a number of which will be similar to existing 200 series cards. This means AMD’s partners are offering a significant variety of cards right off the bat, a pure virtual launch, as it is sometimes called.

However because AMD isn’t producing any retail reference cards they have also opted to not pre-sample the press ahead of time for reviews. And while we’ll be looking at partner cards over the coming weeks, for today’s launch we do not have any cards or benchmarks in hand, and for the immediate future our focus is going to be on Fury.

So with that out of the way, let’s get started on AMD’s new Radeon 300 series lineup, starting from the bottom and working our way up.

AMD R7 360 (Bonaire) Specification Comparison
  AMD Radeon R7 360 AMD Radeon R7 260X AMD Radeon R7 260 AMD Radeon HD 7790
Stream Processors 768 896 768 896
Texture Units 48 56 48 56
ROPs 16 16 16 16
Boost Clock 1050MHz 1100MHz 1000MHz 1000MHz
Memory Clock 6.5Gbps GDDR5 6.5Gbps GDDR5 6Gbps GDDR5 6Gbps GDDR5
Memory Bus Width 128-bit 128-bit 128-bit 128-bit
FP64 1/16 1/16 1/16 1/16
TrueAudio Y Y Y Y
Transistor Count 2.08B 2.08B 2.08B 2.08B
Typical Board Power 100W 115W 95W 85W
Manufacturing Process TSMC 28nm TSMC 28nm TSMC 28nm TSMC 28nm
Architecture GCN 1.1 GCN 1.1 GCN 1.1 GCN 1.1
GPU Bonaire Bonaire Bonaire Bonaire
Launch Date 06/18/15 10/11/13 01/14/14 03/22/13
Launch Price $109 $139 $109 $149

At the bottom of the 300 series stack is the R7 360. This is a cut-down Bonaire based card featuring 12 of Bonaire’s 14 CUs active, for a total of 768 SPs. This part is essentially the replacement for the R7 260, which was similarly a cut-down Bonaire based part.

Like the other refresh cards in the 300 series, the R7 360 pushes the envelope just a bit harder to offer an incremental improvement in performance over its predecessor. AMD has turned up the GPU and memory clockspeeds slightly, from 1000MHz/6Gbps on R7 260 to 1050MHz/6.5Gbps on R7 360. Both the GPU and memory clockspeeds essentially close in on the gap between this card and AMD’s top tier Bonaire card, R7 260X, so everything here is within what we’ve seen the best of Bonaire designs do before.

At a typical board power (TBP) of 100W, R7 360 is spec’d to draw just a bit more power than its predecessor, in line with its clockspeed increases. Meanwhile AMD is telling us that we should see cards with 2GB of VRAM, and from the product lists I’ve seen in advance I’m expecting that this will be the default, at-MSRP configuration for this product. And with an MSRP of $109, it will be a drop-in replacement for the R7 260 from an MSRP standpoint.

Finally, as AMD’s entry-level video card, expect to see AMD targeting this at budget buyers and/or MOBA/F2P gamers. Both AMD and NVIDIA are well aware of how much money DOTA2, League of Legends, and other games within that space have been able to pull in, and they want a piece of that pie themselves. All of these games are designed to be able to run decently on iGPUs, so the company’s marketing focus is on being able to play these games at higher framerates with better image quality.

AMD R7 370 (Pitcairn) Specification Comparison
  AMD Radeon R7 370 AMD Radeon R9 270 AMD Radeon R7 265 AMD Radeon HD 7850
Stream Processors 1024 1280 1024 1024
Texture Units 64 80 64 64
ROPs 32 32 32 32
Core Clock ? 900MHz 900MHz 860MHz
Boost Clock 975MHz 925MHz 925MHz N/A
Memory Clock 5.6Gbps GDDR5 5.6Gbps GDDR5 5.6Gbps GDDR5 4.8Gbps GDDR5
Memory Bus Width 256-bit 256-bit 256-bit 256-bit
FP64 1/16 1/16 1/16 1/16
TrueAudio N N N N
Transistor Count 2.8B 2.8B 2.8B 2.8B
Typical Board Power 110W 150W 150W 150W
Manufacturing Process TSMC 28nm TSMC 28nm TSMC 28nm TSMC 28nm
Architecture GCN 1.0 GCN 1.0 GCN 1.0 GCN 1.0
GPU Pitcairn Pitcairn Pitcairn Pitcairn
Launch Date 06/18/15 11/13/13 02/13/14 03/05/12
Launch Price $149 $179 $149 $249

Up next is the Radeon R7 370. Based on AMD’s venerable Pitcairn GPU, this card is essentially a rework of the R7 265, AMD’s sole cut-down 16 CU (1024 SP) Pitcairn card in the 200 series.

Compared to the R7 265, the R7 370 sees a 5% GPU clockspeed bump, up from the R7 265’s 925MHz boost clock to an “engine clock” (and what we’re assuming is a boost clock) for the R7 370 of 975MHz. Meanwhile memory speeds remain unchanged at 5.6Gbps, which after AMD’s Pitcairn board rework for the 200 series, is about as much as Pitcairn’s memory controllers are up to the task of driving.

Perhaps the most interesting change here is that AMD’s official TBP is spec’d for 110W; this is sharply lower than the official 150W TBP for the R7 265.  Truth be told I question whether this number is grounded in reality – even with some hearty BIOS-level optimizations, that’s a 26% reduction – but we’ll have to see what the retail cards are like once we can get our hands on them.

PowerColor PCS+ R7 370

The big issue for R7 370 right now is that Pitcairn is venerable, but it’s also old. It’s the one GCN 1.0 GPU in the 300 series, and that means it lacks all of the feature updates and optimizations that have come since then. Consequently compared to newer products it doesn’t feature fine-grained clockspeed domains, support for Freesync or True Audio, support for decoding any video over 1080p, nor does it possess performance optimizations like delta color compression.

Pitcairn continues to be a workhorse for AMD in large part because it does its job so well, but the differences between it and the newer GCN GPUs become more readily apparent with each generation. Along with lacking Freesync support, it’s also the only GPU in the 300 series lineup not to support DirectX 12 feature level 12_0 (instead it’s an 11_1 part), so while none of these feature deficits are deal-breakers, it does none the less highlight the fact that like the workhorses that have come before it (e.g. G92), Pitcairn is on its last generation.

Anyhow, AMD’s specifications call for the R7 370 to be offered with both 2GB and 4GB configurations. Based on the early pricing we’ve seen, it looks like the 2GB card will be the common configuration, with 4GB being an option, though less likely. Expect to see 2GB cards hit the market at $149, the same price as the R7 265 before it, with 4GB pricing around $169.

AMD R9 380 (Tonga/Tahiti) Specification Comparison
  AMD Radeon R9 380 AMD Radeon R9 285 AMD Radeon R9 280 AMD Radeon HD 7950 w/Boost
Stream Processors 1792 1792 1792 1792
Texture Units 112 112 112 112
ROPs 32 32 32 32
Core Clock N/A N/A 827MHz 850MHz
Boost Clock 970MHz 918MHz 933MHz 925MHz
Memory Clock 5.5Gbps GDDR5 5.5Gbps GDDR5 5Gbps GDDR5 5Gbps GDDR5
Memory Bus Width 256-bit 256-bit 384-bit 384-bit
FP64 1/16 1/16 1/4 1/4
TrueAudio Y Y N N
Transistor Count 5.0B 5.0B 4.31B 4.31B
Typical Board Power 190W 190W 250W 250W
Manufacturing Process TSMC 28nm TSMC 28nm TSMC 28nm TSMC 28nm
Architecture GCN 1.2 GCN 1.2 GCN 1.0 GCN 1.0
GPU Tonga Tonga Tahiti Tahiti
Launch Date 06/18/15 09/02/14 03/04/14 08/14/12
Launch Price $199 $249 $279 $329

Going up the ladder once more, we have the R9 380. This card is based on AMD’s Tonga GPU, their first GCN 1.2 GPU, and is the descendant of the R9 285, which was launched back in September.

Like the other cards in today’s launch, the R9 380 has seen a spec bump compared to its predecessor. The boost clock is up by about 6% from 918MHz to 970MHz, and the memory clock is unchanged, holding at 5.5Gbps. No other changes have been made, and the other specifications such as the number of CUs (28), the number of ROPs.(32), and the number of memory controllers (4) remains identical to R9 285.

Update 06/18: We have since corrected the memory clocks for the R9 380. AMD's marketing material lists two different values; 5.5Gbps and 5.7Gbps. The original guide we based our information on listed just 5.7, so that is the original value we used. As we always list the minimum specifications for a product, we have corrected this to 5.5Gbps. Our apologies for the confusion.

Unfortunately this also means that we’ll be waiting for another day to see what a fully-enabled Tonga would be like. AMD has to date not shipped a fully enabled chip; it has since become clear that Tonga does in fact have 6 memory controllers (for a 384-bit bus) as opposed to the 4 we see active here, and on the desktop in particular we’ve never seen a part with all 32 CUs (2048 SPs) enabled. The closest thing to a full Tonga remains the R9 M295X in the Apple iMac. Despite being the oldest of the GCN 1.2 chips, Tonga for now also remains the most mysterious.

Sapphire Nitro R9 380

Moving on, compared to the R9 285 the TBP of the R9 380 holds at 190W. Whatever power optimizations AMD has been able to make have essentially been consumed by the clockspeed increases. In the 300 series lineup this makes the R9 380 AMD’s premiere sub-225W card, as these cards can be driven by a pair of 6-pin connectors, or on more forward-looking models a single 8-pin connector.

As far as memory configurations and pricing goes, like the other 300 series cards, R9 380 gets an optional memory bump. The base MSRP of $199 is for the 2GB card, while you can expect to see 4GB cards for $219-$229 or so.  Since AMD’s partners are also offering 4GB R7 370s, a 4GB R9 380 is not all that surprising, and it gives buyers an option for a card that's going to be a little more future-proof than a 2GB card in 2015.

Finally, expect to see AMD pitch the R9 380 as a 1440p card. While we haven’t benchmarked this card yet, based on what we’ve seen with the R9 285, I’m expecting similar results. In which case like the R9 285, AMD is likely overshooting in their expectations. In 2015 Tonga is a good GPU for 1080p gaming, but even with 4GB I’m not sure the performance is there to keep 1440p with high quality settings playable over the next 2-3 years.

Overall it’s interesting to note that of the first 3 300 series cards, all of them ended up being close (if not identical) to the 300 series OEM cards AMD quietly launched back at the start of May. The 360 and 370 are identical, whereas the retail 380 is clocked a bit higher relative to its OEM counterpart. So for anyone who was expecting the retail cards to be similar to the OEM cards, they were right in this case. Though the upside here at least is that the OEM cards don’t significantly deviate from the retail cards, which is a great relief given what we’ve seen in some of the previous generations.

But like the OEM cards, this also means that there are some obvious gaps in AMD’s current lineup from a hardware standpoint. None of these first 3 parts utilizes a fully-enabled GPU; each and every card uses a cut-down GPU of some kind. From a pricing standpoint this is likely a good thing for AMD and its partners since it ensures clear tiers of cards, but when we have single-card entries this is also typically done with fully-enabled GPUs, not cut-down GPUs. If we don’t eventually see X cards for some of these series I will be shocked, but then again we never did get a R9 285X…

In any case, this means that the coexistence of the 200 and 300 series will be an odd one to begin with. Along with the generally lower pricing of the 200 series, you can find fully-enabled Pitcairn and Bonaire cards there that don’t yet exist in the 300 series lineup, so the relative performance of the two series is a bit of a mess for the moment.

Смотрите также