AMD Instinct MI100 vs NVIDIA RTX A5500 Comparison

The data shows a clear victory for the NVIDIA RTX A5500 in the available computational benchmarks, but the AMD Instinct MI100 presents a fundamentally different hardware profile aimed at distinct workloads. While the RTX A5500 achieves a 25.6% higher Geekbench OpenCL score, the MI100 counters with double the memory bandwidth and a larger memory pool, making the choice dependent on whether the task is general compute or memory-bound data processing.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5500 has an average benchmark score of 165,217, while the AMD Instinct MI100 averages 139,035. This represents a 25.6% advantage for the NVIDIA card in the head-to-head Geekbench OpenCL test.

Q: How does the RTX A5500 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The RTX A5500 sits at the 97th percentile of all GPUs. It is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7800, 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB, and 2% behind the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X in average score.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RTX A5500 has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 768.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI100 has 32 GB of HBM2 memory on a 4096-bit bus, delivering 1.23 TB/s bandwidth — a 60% higher bandwidth figure.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both the NVIDIA RTX A5500 and the AMD Instinct MI100 are listed as end-of-life products. The RTX A5500 was released on 2022-03-21, while the MI100 was released earlier on 2020-11-15.

Q: Which GPU has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA RTX A5500 has these features, with 80 ray tracing cores and 320 tensor cores. The AMD Instinct MI100 has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores listed in its specifications.

Q: What are the API support differences?

A: The RTX A5500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI100 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, reflecting its compute-focused design with no display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 uses the GA102 chip with the Ampere architecture on an 8 nm Samsung process, containing 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die. The AMD Instinct MI100 uses the Arcturus chip with CDNA 1.0 architecture on a 7 nm TSMC process, containing 25,600 million transistors on a larger 750 mm² die.

The transistor density reveals a key design split: the NVIDIA chip packs 45.1 million transistors per mm², while the AMD chip achieves 34.1 million per mm². This density advantage, combined with a higher boost clock of 1665 MHz versus 1502 MHz, enables the RTX A5500 to reach 34.10 TFLOPS FP32 performance. The MI100, despite lower FP32 throughput at 23.07 TFLOPS, doubles its FP16 output to 46.14 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, whereas the A5500 offers a 1:1 FP16 ratio at 34.10 TFLOPS.

Feature sets diverge sharply. The RTX A5500 includes 80 ray tracing cores and 320 tensor cores, plus 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The MI100 has 7,680 shading units, 480 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, but no ray tracing or tensor cores. The MI100 compensates with a vastly wider memory bus: 4096-bit versus 384-bit, enabling 1.23 TB/s bandwidth versus 768.0 GB/s. The RTX A5500 also supports a full graphics API stack, while the MI100 reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, and has no display outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A5500 wins decisively in general-purpose compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 174,637 versus 139,035 shows a 25.6% lead, placing it at the 97th percentile of all GPUs. This advantage comes from higher clock speeds, more shading units, and dedicated tensor cores that accelerate AI workloads. The A5500 also wins on graphics capability with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and full DirectX 12 Ultimate support, making it suitable for visualization and rendering tasks that require a display connection.

The AMD Instinct MI100 wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. With 32 GB of HBM2 memory versus 24 GB of GDDR6, the MI100 offers 33% more capacity. Its 1.23 TB/s bandwidth is 60% higher than the A5500's 768.0 GB/s, which is critical for large datasets that exceed the A5500's memory and for workloads that are bandwidth-bound rather than compute-bound. The MI100's higher texture rate of 721.0 GTexel/s versus 532.8 GTexel/s also suggests advantages in texture-heavy operations, though this is offset by its lower pixel rate of 96.13 GPixel/s versus 159.8 GPixel/s.

The MI100's 2:1 FP16 ratio (46.14 TFLOPS) versus the A5500's 1:1 ratio (34.10 TFLOPS) gives AMD a 35% advantage in half-precision compute, which can benefit certain machine learning and scientific workloads that tolerate reduced precision. However, the A5500's tensor cores provide a more specialized path for AI inference and training, potentially delivering higher real-world performance despite the lower raw FP16 number.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The RTX A5500 uses an 8 nm Samsung process, while the MI100 uses a 7 nm TSMC process. Transistor counts are close at 28,300 million versus 25,600 million, but die sizes differ significantly: 628 mm² versus 750 mm².

Clock speeds favor NVIDIA: 1080 MHz base and 1665 MHz boost versus AMD's 1000 MHz base and 1502 MHz boost. Memory configurations are starkly different: 24 GB GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus versus 32 GB HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus. Bandwidth is 768.0 GB/s versus 1.23 TB/s.

Compute resources: 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 80 RT cores, 320 tensor cores versus 7,680 shading units, 480 TMUs, 64 ROPs, no RT cores, no tensor cores. Pixel rate is 159.8 GPixel/s versus 96.13 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 532.8 GTexel/s versus 721.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 34.10 TFLOPS versus 23.07 TFLOPS.

Power and physical specs: 230 W TDP with 1x 8-pin connector and 550 W suggested PSU versus 300 W TDP with 2x 8-pin connectors and 700 W suggested PSU. Both are dual-slot, 267 mm long, and approximately 112 mm tall. The A5500 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs; the MI100 has none. API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4 versus N/A for all. Release dates: 2022-03-21 versus 2020-11-15.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, where the NVIDIA RTX A5500 scores 174,637 against the AMD Instinct MI100's 139,035. This gives NVIDIA a 25.6% victory, a substantial margin that confirms the A5500's superiority in general compute tasks.

This result aligns with the broader benchmark landscape. The A5500's average score of 165,217 places it at the 97th percentile, while the MI100's 139,035 places it at the 96th percentile. The A5500's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation (166,094, a 0.5% higher score) and the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X (168,574, a 2% higher score), showing it competes at the top tier of workstation GPUs. The MI100's nearest rivals are older NVIDIA Tesla V100 variants — the PCIe 16 GB at 138,063 and SXM2 32 GB at 137,731 — both of which it barely edges out by 0.7% and 0.9% respectively.

The single benchmark win for the A5500 is decisive, but it does not capture the MI100's memory advantages. The 1.23 TB/s bandwidth and 32 GB capacity are not reflected in the OpenCL score, which primarily measures compute throughput. For workloads that require moving large data sets, the MI100's memory subsystem could close or reverse this gap. The MI100's FP16 performance of 46.14 TFLOPS also exceeds the A5500's 34.10 TFLOPS, suggesting that mixed-precision workloads might favor AMD despite the OpenCL result.

The Verdict

Choose the NVIDIA RTX A5500 for general-purpose compute and graphics workloads. The data shows it is 25.6% faster in OpenCL, has 34.10 TFLOPS FP32 performance, and includes ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and full display output support. Its 97th percentile ranking and 165,217 average score place it above the MI100's 96th percentile and 139,035 average. The A5500 also requires less power (230 W versus 300 W) and a smaller PSU (550 W versus 700 W), making it easier to integrate into existing systems.

Choose the AMD Instinct MI100 for memory-bound compute tasks. Its 32 GB HBM2 memory with 1.23 TB/s bandwidth doubles the A5500's bandwidth and offers 8 GB more capacity. This is critical for large language models, scientific simulations, or data analytics that exceed 24 GB. The MI100's 46.14 TFLOPS FP16 output also provides a 35% advantage in half-precision workloads, and its 721.0 GTexel/s texture rate exceeds the A5500's 532.8 GTexel/s. However, the lack of display outputs, graphics APIs, and ray tracing cores means it is strictly a compute accelerator.

The verdict is workload-dependent. For a workstation that needs to render, display, and compute, the RTX A5500 is the clear winner. For a server node dedicated to memory-intensive inference or training without display requirements, the MI100's memory subsystem offers a compelling alternative. The A5500's single benchmark win does not tell the whole story — the MI100's 60% bandwidth advantage and larger memory pool are significant for specific use cases, even if general compute performance favors NVIDIA.