AMD Instinct MI300 vs AMD Radeon 760M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300 and AMD Radeon 760M occupy entirely separate performance domains, and the recorded data reflects that split clearly. The Instinct MI300 is a compute-oriented accelerator with no display outputs and no graphics API support, while the Radeon 760M is an integrated graphics processor with full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. The benchmark database contains no overlapping test scores for the two parts, so the use-case split is defined by their architectural roles rather than direct numerical comparison.

The Instinct MI300 wins in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 performance is 47.87 TFLOPS, its texture rate is 1,496.0 GTexel/s, and it carries 128 GB of HBM3 memory across an 8192-bit bus. These figures position it for dense matrix operations, large-model inference, and high-bandwidth data movement. The Radeon 760M, by contrast, delivers 5.323 TFLOPS FP32, 83.17 GTexel/s texture rate, and relies on system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The 760M wins in power efficiency per watt, drawing 15 W versus the MI300's 600 W, and it wins in graphics feature support, offering a pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s and 8 ray tracing cores.

The Radeon 760M also wins in accessibility. It is an IGP with motherboard-dependent display outputs, meaning it can drive a desktop or laptop display directly. The Instinct MI300 has no outputs and requires a separate display adapter. For rendering, gaming, or any graphical workload, the 760M is the only viable option between the two. For server-side compute, the MI300 is the only viable option. The database shows the 760M at the 35th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 6019, while the MI300 has no recorded benchmarks and sits at the 50th percentile by default.

Architecture Differences

The two chips share a manufacturer and foundry but diverge in nearly every architectural dimension. The Instinct MI300 uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on TSMC's 5 nm process, while the Radeon 760M uses RDNA 3.0 on TSMC's 4 nm process. The process node difference is small, but the die sizes are not. The MI300 measures 1017 mm² with 153,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The 760M measures 178 mm² with 25,390 million transistors, yielding 142.6 million per mm². The MI300 is roughly 5.7 times larger by die area and carries about 6 times the transistor count.

The shading unit counts reflect the compute disparity. The MI300 has 14,080 shading units and 880 texture mapping units. The 760M has 512 shading units and 32 texture mapping units. The MI300 has 0 ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, confirming it is not designed for rasterization. The 760M has 16 ROPs and a pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s. The MI300 has no ray tracing cores listed, while the 760M has 8. Neither part lists tensor cores.

Memory architecture is another major divider. The MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, clocked at 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective. The 760M uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, no dedicated VRAM, and no discrete memory clock. The MI300's memory subsystem is purpose-built for bandwidth-hungry compute; the 760M's is a general-purpose shared pool.

Power and connectivity differ as well. The MI300 has a 600 W TDP, requires a 1000 W suggested PSU, and uses 2x 8-pin power connectors. The 760M has a 15 W TDP, uses no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU. The MI300 interfaces via PCIe 5.0 x16; the 760M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The MI300 has no display outputs and no graphics API support. The 760M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The clock behavior also contrasts: the MI300 runs at 1000 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost, while the 760M runs at 800 MHz base and boosts to 2599 MHz. The 760M's higher boost clock partially compensates for its lower shading unit count, but not enough to close the compute gap.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table in the database is empty, and the win counts are 0 for both parts. This means no direct comparison tests exist between the MI300 and the 760M. The analysis must therefore rely on the 760M's standalone benchmark scores and the MI300's architectural specifications.

The Radeon 760M's recorded scores show a clear compute profile. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 30,336, which is its highest recorded result. Geekbench OpenCL follows at 20,255. PassMark G3D gives 5,310, PassMark G2D gives 890, and PassMark GPU Compute gives 2,840. The DirectX tests are lower: PassMark DirectX 11 scores 52, DirectX 9 scores 65, DirectX 12 scores 25, and DirectX 10 scores 19. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test scores 400. These numbers indicate that the 760M performs better in compute-oriented APIs than in legacy rasterization tests, which aligns with its RDNA 3.0 architecture and 8 ray tracing cores.

The nearest rivals for the 760M provide context for its standing. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 has an average score of 6,001, a 0.3% advantage over the 760M's 6,019 average. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M scores 6,000, also a 0.3% edge. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5,996, a 0.4% advantage. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 6,049, which is 0.5% higher, meaning the 760M trails that card by half a percent. These deltas are all within a single percentage point, indicating that the 760M sits in a tightly clustered performance band with these four rivals. The 760M's average benchmark score of 6,019 places it just above the RX 6400 and GTX 770M, and just below the Quadro P2000.

For the MI300, no benchmark scores exist in the database. Its percentile versus all GPUs is 50, but with no measured tests, that value carries no comparative weight. The absence of data means the MI300 cannot be ranked against the 760M or any other GPU in this database. What the specifications show is a compute accelerator with 47.87 TFLOPS FP32, 5.32 TB/s memory bandwidth, and 1,496.0 GTexel/s texture rate, all of which dwarf the 760M's corresponding figures by orders of magnitude. The FP32 gap is roughly 9 times, the texture rate gap is roughly 18 times, and the memory bandwidth gap is enormous given the 760M's system-dependent bandwidth.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Radeon 760M delivers 5.323 TFLOPS FP32. The MI300's figure is approximately 9 times higher.

Q: Does the Instinct MI300 support DirectX or Vulkan?

A: No. The database lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A for the MI300. The Radeon 760M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The 760M uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth and a system shared bus width.

Q: How does the Radeon 760M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 760M's average benchmark score is 6,019. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 scores 6,001 (0.3% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M scores 6,000 (0.3% higher), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5,996 (0.4% higher), and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 6,049 (0.5% lower, meaning the 760M is 0.5% ahead of the Quadro P2000).

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The MI300 has a 600 W TDP and requires a 1000 W suggested PSU with 2x 8-pin power connectors. The 760M has a 15 W TDP, uses no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which GPU has display outputs?

A: The MI300 has no outputs. The 760M has motherboard-dependent display outputs, meaning its display connectivity depends on the host motherboard.

Specification Differences

The following table lists only the fields where the two GPUs differ, based on the recorded data.

| Field | AMD Instinct MI300 | AMD Radeon 760M |

|-------|--------------------|-----------------|

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | 25,390 million |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 178 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | 142.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 800 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1700 MHz | 2599 MHz |

| Memory Size | 128 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | HBM3 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 5.32 TB/s | System Dependent |

| Memory Clock | 1300 MHz 5.2 Gbps effective | System Shared |

| Shading Units | 14080 | 512 |

| TMUs | 880 | 32 |

| ROPs | 0 | 16 |

| RT Cores | null | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 41.58 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,496.0 GTexel/s | 83.17 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 47.87 TFLOPS | 5.323 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1) | 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 600 W | 15 W |

| Slot Width | null | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 1000 W | null |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Motherboard Dependent |

| DirectX Support | N/A | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL Support | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan Support | N/A | 1.4 |

| Length | 267 mm 10.5 inches | null |

| Height | 111 mm 4.4 inches | null |

| Production Status | null | Active |

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2024-01-30 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | Navi II IGP |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 50 | 35 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 6019 |