AMD Instinct MI100 vs NVIDIA Quadro GP100 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the benchmark score difference between the AMD Instinct MI100 and the NVIDIA Quadro GP100?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Instinct MI100 scores 139035, while the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 scores 87445. This gives the MI100 a 59% advantage.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The AMD Instinct MI100 ranks in the 96th percentile, while the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 ranks in the 93rd percentile. Both are high performers, but the MI100 sits closer to the top of the database.

Q: How does the memory configuration differ between the two cards?

A: The AMD Instinct MI100 features 32 GB of HBM2 memory with a bandwidth of 1.23 TB/s, whereas the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 has 16 GB of HBM2 memory with a bandwidth of 732.2 GB/s.

Q: What are the TDP requirements for each card?

A: The AMD Instinct MI100 has a TDP of 300 W and requires a 700 W power supply. The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 has a lower TDP of 235 W and needs a 550 W power supply.

Q: Which card has a higher base clock speed?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 has a base clock of 1304 MHz, which is higher than the AMD Instinct MI100's base clock of 1000 MHz. However, the MI100's boost clock of 1502 MHz exceeds the GP100's boost clock of 1443 MHz.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both the AMD Instinct MI100 and the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 are listed as end-of-life products. They were released in November 2020 and September 2016, respectively.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI100 and the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 represent fundamentally different approaches to GPU architecture. The MI100 is built on AMD's CDNA 1.0 architecture, specifically designed for compute workloads, while the Quadro GP100 uses NVIDIA's Pascal architecture, which was a general-purpose design for both graphics and compute.

The manufacturing process highlights a significant generational gap. The MI100 uses a 7 nm process from TSMC, while the Quadro GP100 is built on a 16 nm process, also from TSMC. This process advantage helps the MI100 pack 25,600 million transistors onto a 750 mm² die, compared to the Quadro GP100's 15,300 million transistors on a 610 mm² die. The resulting transistor density is 34.1 million per mm² for the MI100 versus 25.1 million per mm² for the Quadro GP100.

The compute resources differ substantially. The MI100 contains 7680 shading units and 480 texture mapping units, while the Quadro GP100 has 3584 shading units and 224 texture mapping units. The MI100's shading unit count is more than double that of its rival. However, the raster operation pipeline favors the Quadro GP100, which has 96 ROPs compared to the MI100's 64 ROPs. Neither card includes dedicated RT cores or tensor cores in their specifications.

Memory architecture shows both similarity and divergence. Both use HBM2 memory with a 4096-bit bus width, but the MI100 doubles the capacity to 32 GB and achieves 1.23 TB/s bandwidth, while the Quadro GP100 offers 16 GB at 732.2 GB/s. The memory clock rates reflect this, with the MI100 running at 1200 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective) and the Quadro GP100 at 715 MHz (1430 Mbps effective).

The cards also differ in their interface and power delivery. The MI100 uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and requires two 8-pin power connectors, while the Quadro GP100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and needs a single 8-pin connector. The MI100 has no display outputs, whereas the Quadro GP100 provides one DVI and four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. API support follows the same pattern: the MI100 reports no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, while the Quadro GP100 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head benchmark test is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are decisive. The AMD Instinct MI100 scores 139,035, while the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 manages 87,445. This represents a 59% delta in favor of the MI100, a substantial margin that reflects the architectural and specification gaps between the two cards.

One win for the MI100 and zero for the Quadro GP100 is the final tally from the head-to-head data. The 59% difference is far larger than the margins seen in the MI100's nearest rival comparisons. For example, the MI100 leads the NVIDIA Tesla V100 PCIe 16 GB by only 0.9%. The Quadro GP100, meanwhile, sits very close to its own nearest rivals: it trails the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 by just 0.4%, and it is 4.6% behind the NVIDIA RTX A4500.

The percentile data reinforces the benchmark result. The MI100's 96th percentile score places it above the Quadro GP100's 93rd percentile, though both cards are clearly positioned in the upper tier of the database. The gap in raw score, however, is what matters most: a 59% advantage in the recorded test is not a marginal difference, it indicates a fundamentally different performance class.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear choice for compute-heavy workloads: the AMD Instinct MI100 is the stronger card in the sole measured benchmark. Its 139,035 Geekbench OpenCL score surpasses the Quadro GP100's 87,445. The MI100 also offers double the memory capacity (32 GB versus 16 GB) and significantly higher memory bandwidth (1.23 TB/s versus 732.2 GB/s), which are critical for large datasets.

The NVIDIA Quadro GP100, despite being the older architecture, retains some advantages that should not be overlooked in the database. It has a higher pixel rate (138.5 GPixel/s versus 96.13 GPixel/s) and more ROPs (96 versus 64), which suggests it may handle certain pixel-bound tasks more efficiently. It also consumes less power (235 W versus 300 W) and has a lower suggested PSU requirement (550 W versus 700 W), which makes it easier to integrate into existing systems.

The choice depends on the workload profile. If the task is dominated by the OpenCL benchmark, which emphasizes parallel compute throughput, the MI100 is the obvious pick. Its higher shading unit count and memory bandwidth provide the raw resources needed for such workloads. For tasks that rely more on pixel throughput or that require display output, the Quadro GP100's specifications are more suitable, although its compute ceiling is far lower.

The database shows that the MI100 sits much closer to its nearest rivals than the Quadro GP100 does to its own. The MI100's nearest rival, the Tesla V100 PCIe 16 GB, is only 0.7% behind, while the Quadro GP100's nearest rival, the Radeon PRO W7600, is also close at 0.4% behind. This suggests that the MI100 is competing with a much higher tier of accelerators than the Quadro GP100.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI100 | NVIDIA Quadro GP100 |

|:---|:---|:---|

| Architecture | CDNA 1.0 | Pascal |

| Chip | Arcturus | GP100 |

| Process node | 7 nm | 16 nm |

| Transistors | 25,600 million | 15,300 million |

| Die size | 750 mm² | 610 mm² |

| Transistor density | 34.1M / mm² | 25.1M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1000 MHz | 1304 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1502 MHz | 1443 MHz |

| Memory size | 32 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory clock | 1200 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective) | 715 MHz (1430 Mbps effective) |

| Memory bandwidth | 1.23 TB/s | 732.2 GB/s |

| Shading units | 7680 | 3584 |

| Texture mapping units | 480 | 224 |

| Render output units | 64 | 96 |

| Pixel rate | 96.13 GPixel/s | 138.5 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 721.0 GTexel/s | 323.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 23.07 TFLOPS | 10.34 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 46.14 TFLOPS (2:1) | 20.69 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 300 W | 235 W |

| Power connectors | 2x 8-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 550 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | No outputs | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| API support | DirectX N/A, OpenGL N/A, Vulkan N/A | DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.3 |

| Release date | 2020-11-15 | 2016-09-30 |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI100 wins in raw compute throughput across nearly every measured metric. Its FP32 performance of 23.07 TFLOPS is more than double the Quadro GP100's 10.34 TFLOPS, and its FP16 performance of 46.14 TFLOPS similarly doubles the Quadro's 20.69 TFLOPS. The texture rate follows the same pattern: 721.0 GTexel/s versus 323.2 GTexel/s. The MI100's memory bandwidth advantage (1.23 TB/s versus 732.2 GB/s) and larger frame buffer (32 GB versus 16 GB) make it the better choice for data-heavy applications. Its 59% lead in the OpenCL benchmark reflects these advantages in practice.

The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 wins in specific areas related to pixel processing and system integration. Its pixel rate of 138.5 GPixel/s is higher than the MI100's 96.13 GPixel/s, and its 96 ROPs outperform the MI100's 64. These metrics suggest that the Quadro GP100 retains an edge in rendering tasks that depend on rapid pixel fill. The Quadro also consumes less power (235 W versus 300 W) and has a lower PSU requirement (550 W versus 700 W), making it an easier fit for existing systems. The presence of display outputs and full API support (DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.3) means it can serve as a workstation card with interactive capabilities, whereas the MI100 is a compute-only accelerator.

For compute-heavy workloads, such as those using OpenCL, the MI100's dual FP32 and FP16 throughput, combined with its massive memory subsystem, deliver the required performance. For workloads that prioritize pixel fill, power efficiency, or display connectivity, the Quadro GP100 provides a viable alternative, albeit one that is significantly slower in the primary compute benchmark. The data supports selecting the MI100 for pure compute density, while the Quadro GP100 remains relevant for mixed-function environments where its pixel rate and interface support matter.