AMD Instinct MI300 vs AMD Radeon 8040S Comparison

The Verdict

The database records two fundamentally different AMD products under the same manufacturer name. The AMD Instinct MI300 is a 600 W data center accelerator built on the CDNA 3.0 architecture, while the AMD Radeon 8040S is a 55 W integrated graphics processor (IGP) for mobile devices using RDNA 3.5. The MI300 carries no display outputs, no DirectX/OpenGL/Vulkan API support, and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, meaning it is not designed for traditional graphics workloads. The 8040S, by contrast, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and delivers 89.60 GPixel/s. The data shows no overlap in target use cases: the MI300 is a compute accelerator for server installations, and the 8040S is an integrated GPU for portable systems. Users requiring graphics output or gaming API support should select the 8040S. Users requiring massive FP32 throughput, 128 GB of HBM3 memory, or a 5.32 TB/s memory bus should select the MI300. The MI300 sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the 8040S sits at the 17th percentile. Neither part is a general-purpose consumer graphics card.

Architecture Differences

The MI300 uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on TSMC's 5 nm process, with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The 8040S uses the Strix Halo chip built on TSMC's 4 nm process, with a 308 mm² die and an unknown transistor count. The MI300 is based on CDNA 3.0, an architecture aimed at compute workloads, while the 8040S uses RDNA 3.5, an architecture with graphics and ray tracing support. The MI300 has 14,080 shading units, 880 texture mapping units, and no ROPs, pixel rate, or ray tracing cores listed. The 8040S has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 16 ray tracing cores. The MI300's memory subsystem uses 128 GB of HBM3 across an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, plus a dedicated memory clock of 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The 8040S uses system shared memory, with a system dependent bandwidth and no dedicated memory clock. The MI300 has no display outputs, while the 8040S has portable device dependent outputs. The MI300 draws 600 W with two 8-pin power connectors and a suggested 1000 W power supply. The 8040S draws 55 W with no power connectors and is classified as an IGP. Both use a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. The MI300 was released on 2023-01-03, the 8040S on 2025-01-05. The MI300's predecessor is Radeon Instinct, while the 8040S's predecessor is Polaris Mobile.

FAQ

Q: Which product has more compute throughput?

A: The MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 and 47.87 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1), while the 8040S delivers 5.734 TFLOPS of FP32 and 5.734 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1). The MI300 provides roughly 8.35 times the FP32 throughput of the 8040S.

Q: Does the MI300 support DirectX or Vulkan?

A: No. The MI300 lists DirectX as N/A, OpenGL as N/A, and Vulkan as N/A. The 8040S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each product?

A: The MI300 has 128 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The 8040S uses system shared memory, with system dependent bandwidth and no dedicated memory type or bus width listed.

Q: How do the thermal and power requirements differ?

A: The MI300 has a TDP of 600 W and requires two 8-pin power connectors plus a suggested 1000 W power supply. The 8040S has a TDP of 55 W, requires no power connectors, and has no suggested power supply listed.

Q: Which product has ray tracing support?

A: The 8040S has 16 ray tracing cores. The MI300 lists no ray tracing cores in the database.

Q: How does the 8040S compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The 8040S has an average benchmark score of 2440. It is 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 710M (2433), 0.6% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics 610 (2425), 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M (2422), and 1.1% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7400 (2467).

Specification Differences

The two parts differ across nearly every recorded field. The process node is 5 nm for the MI300 and 4 nm for the 8040S. Die size is 1017 mm² versus 308 mm². The MI300 has 153,000 million transistors; the 8040S has an unknown count. Transistor density is 150.4 million per mm² for the MI300 and not listed for the 8040S. Base clock is 1000 MHz versus 1295 MHz. Boost clock is 1700 MHz versus 2800 MHz. The MI300 has a memory clock of 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective); the 8040S lists system shared memory with no clock. Memory size is 128 GB HBM3 versus system shared. Bus width is 8192 bit versus system shared. Bandwidth is 5.32 TB/s versus system dependent. Shading units are 14,080 versus 1,024. TMUs are 880 versus 64. ROPs are 0 versus 32. Ray tracing cores are not listed for the MI300 and 16 for the 8040S. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s versus 89.60 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus 179.2 GTexel/s. FP32 is 47.87 TFLOPS versus 5.734 TFLOPS. FP16 is 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 5.734 TFLOPS (1:1). TDP is 600 W versus 55 W. Slot width is not listed for the MI300 and IGP for the 8040S. Power connectors are two 8-pin versus none. Suggested PSU is 1000 W versus none. Display outputs are none versus portable device dependent. DirectX is N/A versus 12 Ultimate (12_2). OpenGL is N/A versus 4.6. Vulkan is N/A versus 1.4. Dimensions are 267 mm by 111 mm for the MI300; no dimensions are listed for the 8040S. Production status is not listed for the MI300 and Active for the 8040S. Release date is 2023-01-03 versus 2025-01-05. Predecessor is Radeon Instinct versus Polaris Mobile. Both share PCIe 5.0 x16, TSMC as foundry, and AMD as manufacturer.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the MI300 and the 8040S. The MI300 has an empty benchmarks array, an average benchmark score of 0, a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs, and no nearest rivals. The 8040S has seven recorded PassMark tests. Its highest PassMark score is 10,578 in the G3D test, followed by 5,138 in GPU compute, 1,052 in G2D, 134 in DirectX 9, 80 in DirectX 11, 48 in DirectX 10, and 47 in DirectX 12. The 8040S's average benchmark score is 2,440, placing it at the 17th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce 710M at 2,433 (0.3% behind), the Intel HD Graphics 610 at 2,425 (0.6% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M at 2,422 (0.7% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 7400 at 2,467 (1.1% ahead). The MI300's raw compute specifications vastly exceed the 8040S in every measured compute category, but the MI300 has no recorded graphics benchmark scores, no display support, and no API compatibility. The 8040S, despite its lower compute figures, is the only one of the two with functional graphics and rendering capabilities in the database. The MI300's 47.87 TFLOPS FP32 figure is 8.35 times the 8040S's 5.734 TFLOPS. The MI300's texture rate of 1,496.0 GTexel/s is 8.35 times the 8040S's 179.2 GTexel/s. The 8040S's pixel rate of 89.60 GPixel/s has no comparable MI300 figure, as the MI300 records 0 MPixel/s. In terms of memory, the MI300's 128 GB HBM3 pool and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth dwarf the 8040S's system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The MI300 also carries a 600 W TDP against the 8040S's 55 W, a 10.9 times power draw difference. The 8040S boosts to 2800 MHz, 1,100 MHz higher than the MI300's 1700 MHz boost. The 8040S also has 16 ray tracing cores, while the MI300 has none listed. The MI300 has 13,056 more shading units than the 8040S and 816 more TMUs. The 8040S has 32 ROPs, while the MI300 has zero. The MI300's 1017 mm² die is 709 mm² larger than the 8040S's 308 mm² die. The MI300 was released approximately two years before the 8040S based on the recorded dates. The 8040S is the only one of the two with an active production status. The MI300 has no production status recorded. The 8040S's nearest rival data shows it sits in a competitive cluster with older mobile and entry-level parts, all within 1.1% of its average score. The MI300 has no rival comparisons in the database, leaving its relative standing defined only by its 50th percentile rank and its absolute specification sheet.