AMD Instinct MI100 vs AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 Comparison

The AMD Instinct MI100 and the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 are both end-of-life data center accelerators from the same manufacturer, separated by roughly two years of design work and one architectural leap. The recorded data shows the MI100 comfortably ahead: an average benchmark score of 139035 versus 92466 for the MI60, a gap of about 50 percent in the Geekbench OpenCL run. That is not a marginal generational improvement, it is a clear tier change. The MI100 sits in the 96th percentile of all GPUs measured in the database, while the MI60 lands in the 93rd. Both cards share a 7 nm TSMC process, 32 GB of HBM2 memory on a 4096-bit bus, a 300 W board power rating, and identical physical dimensions, which makes the differences in compute output and architecture the whole story here.

Where Each One Wins

The MI100 wins the only benchmark where the two directly overlap. In Geekbench OpenCL, the MI100 scored 139035 against the MI60's 92488, a 50.3 percent advantage for the newer card. The head-to-head record in the database stands at one win for the MI100 and zero for the MI60, so every cross-comparable measurement favors the Arcturus-based part.

That said, the MI60 does hold a few narrow technical wins in the raw specification data. Its boost clock is higher, 1800 MHz against 1502 MHz, and its base clock is higher too, 1200 MHz versus 1000 MHz. It also posts a higher pixel fill rate, 115.2 GPixel/s versus 96.13 GPixel/s, and it carries a mini-DisplayPort 1.4a output where the MI100 has no display outputs at all. If a workload depends on peak pixel throughput or requires a directly attached display, the MI60 is the only one of the two that covers it, at least on paper.

For everything else in the compute domain, the MI100 wins. Raw FP32 throughput is 23.07 TFLOPS versus 14.75, FP16 is 46.14 TFLOPS versus 29.49, texture rate is 721.0 GTexel/s versus 460.8, and memory bandwidth is 1.23 TB/s versus 1.02 TB/s. The MI100 wins on every one of those axes, and by wide margins.

The Verdict

The data makes this a straightforward call. Anyone choosing between these two for GPU compute should take the MI100. A 50 percent performance lead in the only shared benchmark, roughly 56 percent higher FP32 throughput, and 21 percent more memory bandwidth together mean the MI60 cannot compete on calculation-heavy workloads. The MI100 also ranks against tougher company: its closest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Tesla V100 PCIe 16 GB and the Tesla V100 SXM2 32 GB, and it edges both out. The MI60's nearest rivals, by contrast, are professional workstation cards like the RTX A4500, and two of them, the Radeon Pro VII and the Radeon RX 7900M, actually score above it.

The MI60 makes sense only in narrow situations visible in the spec sheet. It offers a display output for direct monitoring, a feature the MI100 lacks entirely. Its higher pixel rate supports that role. And both cards draw the same 300 W and need the same suggested 700 W power supply, so there is no efficiency argument either way at the system level. On pure measured compute, the verdict is one-sided: the MI100 is the stronger accelerator in every recorded test.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one directly comparable result between the two cards, and it is decisive.

Geekbench OpenCL: AMD Instinct MI100 scored 139035; AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 scored 92488. The MI100 wins by 50.3 percent. That single number frames the entire comparison: for OpenCL compute workloads, the MI100 delivers roughly one and a half times the throughput of its predecessor-class rival.

The MI60's own recorded runs provide additional context. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 92488 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 92444 are nearly identical, which indicates consistent performance across the two compute APIs rather than a strong-API/weak-API split. Against its nearest rivals, the MI60 sits 0.9 percent above the NVIDIA RTX A4500 and 1.5 percent above the RTX A4500 Mobile, but 4.8 percent below the AMD Radeon Pro VII and 5.2 percent below the Radeon RX 7900M. It is a mid-pack card among its peers.

The MI100's peer group is stronger and it still leads. It is 0.7 percent ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla V100 PCIe 16 GB, 0.9 percent ahead of the Tesla V100 SXM2 32 GB, 1.9 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO V620, and 2.4 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo. Those are narrow margins, but they are all in the same direction: the MI100 tops every one of its recorded rivals.

Fill-rate and throughput numbers reinforce the benchmark picture. The MI100's 721.0 GTexel/s texture rate beats the MI60's 460.8 GTexel/s by roughly 56 percent, closely tracking the FP32 ratio. Memory bandwidth tells the same story: 1.23 TB/s for the MI100 against 1.02 TB/s for the MI60, a 21 percent advantage that feeds the compute units. The one spec-level win for the MI60 is pixel fill rate, 115.2 GPixel/s against 96.13 GPixel/s, a result of its much higher boost clock and identical 64 ROPs.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the MI100 than the MI60 in benchmarks?

A: In the shared Geekbench OpenCL test, the MI100 scored 139035 versus 92488, a 50.3 percent advantage. The MI100 also averages 139035 overall against the MI60's 92466 average.

Q: Do both cards have the same amount of memory?

A: Yes. Both ship with 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus. The difference is bandwidth: the MI100 delivers 1.23 TB/s while the MI60 delivers 1.02 TB/s.

Q: Which card competes with higher-tier hardware?

A: The MI100. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Tesla V100 PCIe 16 GB and Tesla V100 SXM2 32 GB, and it scores above both. The MI60's rivals include the Radeon Pro VII and Radeon RX 7900M, both of which outscore it.

Q: Can either card drive a display?

A: Only the MI60. It has one mini-DisplayPort 1.4a output. The MI100 has no display outputs at all and is purely a compute card.

Q: Do they differ in power requirements?

A: Both have a 300 W TDP and both call for a suggested 700 W power supply. The connector layouts differ: the MI100 uses two 8-pin connectors, the MI60 uses one 6-pin plus one 8-pin.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life. The MI100 was released on November 15, 2020, and the MI60 on November 17, 2018.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent consecutive data center architectures from AMD, and the gap between them is substantial. The MI60 is built on the Vega 20 chip using GCN 5.1, the last major revision of AMD's long-running Graphics Core Next design. The MI100 uses the Arcturus chip on CDNA 1.0, the first generation of AMD's compute-focused CDNA line, which dropped graphics-first design priorities in favor of machine learning and HPC throughput.

The scale difference is large. Arcturus packs 25,600 million transistors into a 750 mm² die, while Vega 20 holds 13,230 million transistors in a 331 mm² die. That is nearly double the transistor count and more than double the die area. Interestingly, transistor density favors the older chip, 40.0M per mm² versus 34.1M per mm², meaning the MI100 achieves its output through sheer silicon scale rather than denser packing.

Compute resources scale accordingly. The MI100 has 7680 shading units and 480 texture mapping units; the MI60 has 4096 and 256 respectively. Both carry 64 render output units and neither has dedicated RT cores or tensor cores listed in the database. Clock strategy runs opposite to resource count: the MI60 runs faster, 1200 MHz base and 1800 MHz boost, while the MI100 runs 1000 MHz base and 1502 MHz boost. The MI100 wins by doing more per clock across many more units, not by clocking higher.

Both parts use TSMC's 7 nm process, both connect over PCIe 4.0 x16, and both use HBM2 memory. The MI60's graphics lineage shows in its API support, with DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 listed, while the MI100 lists N/A across all three, consistent with a pure compute product.

Specification Differences

The fields where the two cards actually differ, per the database:

• Chip: Arcturus (MI100) versus Vega 20 (MI60)
• Architecture: CDNA 1.0 versus GCN 5.1
• Generation: Instinct (MIx) versus Radeon Instinct (MIx)
• Transistors: 25,600 million versus 13,230 million
• Die size: 750 mm² versus 331 mm²
• Transistor density: 34.1M per mm² versus 40.0M per mm²
• Base clock: 1000 MHz versus 1200 MHz
• Boost clock: 1502 MHz versus 1800 MHz
• Memory speed: 1200 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective) versus 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective)
• Memory bandwidth: 1.23 TB/s versus 1.02 TB/s
• Shading units: 7680 versus 4096
• TMUs: 480 versus 256
• Pixel rate: 96.13 GPixel/s versus 115.2 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 721.0 GTexel/s versus 460.8 GTexel/s
• FP32: 23.07 TFLOPS versus 14.75 TFLOPS
• FP16: 46.14 TFLOPS versus 29.49 TFLOPS
• Power connectors: 2x 8-pin versus 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
• Display outputs: none versus 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
• API support: N/A across DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan versus DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.3
• Release date: November 15, 2020 versus November 17, 2018
• Predecessor line: Radeon Instinct versus FirePro Data Center

Everything else matches: 7 nm TSMC fabrication, 32 GB HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus, 64 ROPs, 300 W TDP, dual-slot width, 700 W suggested power supply, PCIe 4.0 x16, the same 267 mm length and 111 mm height, and end-of-life status for both. The bottom line from the recorded data: the MI100 is the stronger compute accelerator in every measured way, and the MI60's remaining advantages are a display output, a higher pixel fill rate, and higher clock speeds that do not translate into higher benchmark scores.