AMD Instinct MI300 vs AMD Radeon 8050S Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300 and AMD Radeon 8050S serve entirely different segments of the GPU market, and the recorded data reflects this split clearly. The Instinct MI300 is a compute-oriented accelerator designed for data center workloads, while the Radeon 8050S is a mobile integrated graphics processor aimed at portable devices.

The Instinct MI300 wins decisively on raw compute throughput. Its FP32 output of 47.87 TFLOPS is more than four times the 11.47 TFLOPS delivered by the Radeon 8050S. The texture rate tells a similar story: the MI300 produces 1,496.0 GTexel/s against 358.4 GTexel/s for the 8050S, a factor of roughly 4.2x. These are the metrics that matter for heavy parallel computation, scientific simulation, and large-scale matrix operations.

The Radeon 8050S wins on efficiency and integration. Its thermal design power sits at 55 W, compared to 600 W for the MI300. The 8050S also carries a full graphics feature set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the MI300 reports N/A for all three APIs. The 8050S has 64 ROPs and a pixel rate of 179.2 GPixel/s, while the MI300 shows 0 ROPs and 0 MPixel/s. The MI300 has no display outputs; the 8050S provides outputs dependent on the portable device it is integrated into.

The 8050S also wins on benchmark presence. It has two recorded Geekbench scores: 65,818 in OpenCL and 58,398 in Vulkan, averaging 62,108. The MI300 has no recorded benchmarks in the database, and its percentile ranking sits at 50, while the 8050S ranks at the 89th percentile among all GPUs. This means the 8050S outperforms 89 percent of all GPUs in the database based on its average benchmark score, a strong position for an integrated part.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The Instinct MI300 uses CDNA 3.0, built on the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The Radeon 8050S uses RDNA 3.5, built on the Strix Halo chip. This fundamental split explains most of the behavioral differences: CDNA 3.0 prioritizes compute throughput and memory bandwidth, while RDNA 3.5 balances rasterization, ray tracing, and power efficiency for client devices.

Manufacturing processes differ by one nanometer node. The MI300 is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the 8050S uses a 4 nm process, also at TSMC. The MI300 packs 153,000 million transistors onto a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per square millimeter. The 8050S has an unknown transistor count on a 308 mm² die. The MI300's die is more than three times larger, which is consistent with its role as a data center accelerator.

Cache and compute resource allocation diverges sharply. The MI300 provides 14,080 shading units and 880 texture mapping units. The 8050S provides 2,048 shading units and 128 TMUs. The MI300 has no dedicated ray tracing cores listed, while the 8050S includes 32 ray tracing cores. The MI300 is a pure compute part with no graphics pipeline, which explains the zero ROP count and the N/A graphics API status. The 8050S is a full graphics processor with 64 ROPs and a complete API stack.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The 8050S uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, a design choice that keeps power low and integrates the GPU into the host memory pool. The MI300's memory clock runs at 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective data rate, while the 8050S has no dedicated memory clock because it shares system memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the Instinct MI300 and the Radeon 8050S. The MI300 has zero recorded benchmark scores, and the head-to-head array is empty. This absence itself is informative: the two parts are not competing for the same workloads, so a direct comparison suite has not been generated.

The 8050S nevertheless has standalone benchmark data that can be positioned against its nearest rivals. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 65,818. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 58,398. Its average benchmark score is 62,108. The nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, averages 61,896, putting the 8050S ahead by 0.3 percent. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 averages 63,693, which is 2.5 percent above the 8050S. The AMD Radeon RX 7600M averages 63,775, 2.6 percent higher. The AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP averages 63,830, 2.7 percent higher.

These margins are narrow. The 8050S sits within roughly three percent of four different rivals, three of which edge it out by less than three percent. The 89th percentile ranking among all GPUs indicates that, despite trailing those specific rivals, the 8050S still lands well above the median GPU in the database. The MI300's 50th percentile with no benchmarks reflects an absence of data rather than a performance judgment.

The FP32 comparison between the two parts is the clearest numeric head-to-head available. The MI300's 47.87 TFLOPS is 4.17 times the 8050S's 11.47 TFLOPS. Texture rate shows a similar ratio: 1,496.0 GTexel/s divided by 358.4 GTexel/s equals 4.17. These ratios are consistent because both metrics scale with the shading unit count: 14,080 divided by 2,048 equals 6.875, but clock speeds and architectural efficiency differences compress the final compute ratio.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ across nearly every specification field in the database. Process node: the MI300 uses 5 nm, the 8050S uses 4 nm. Die size: 1017 mm² versus 308 mm². Base clock: 1000 MHz for the MI300 versus 1295 MHz for the 8050S. Boost clock: 1700 MHz versus 2800 MHz. The 8050S runs substantially higher clocks, which helps it extract competitive compute from a much smaller silicon footprint.

Shading units: 14,080 versus 2,048. Texture mapping units: 880 versus 128. Raster operation units: 0 versus 64. Ray tracing cores: none listed versus 32. Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s versus 179.2 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus 358.4 GTexel/s. FP32 compute: 47.87 TFLOPS versus 11.47 TFLOPS. FP16 compute: 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 11.47 TFLOPS (1:1).

Memory: 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth for the MI300, versus system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth for the 8050S. Memory clock: 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective for the MI300, none listed for the 8050S. Thermal design power: 600 W versus 55 W. Power connectors: 2x 8-pin versus none. Suggested PSU: 1000 W for the MI300, not listed for the 8050S.

Bus interface is identical: PCIe 5.0 x16 for both. Display outputs: none for the MI300, portable device dependent for the 8050S. DirectX support: N/A versus 12 Ultimate (12_2). OpenGL: N/A versus 4.6. Vulkan: N/A versus 1.4. Dimensions: the MI300 measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height; the 8050S has no listed dimensions because it is an integrated part. Slot width: not listed for the MI300, IGP for the 8050S.

Release dates differ by two years. The MI300 launched on January 3, 2023. The 8050S launched on January 5, 2025. The MI300's predecessor is Radeon Instinct; the 8050S's predecessor is Polaris Mobile. The 8050S has an active production status; the MI300 has no production status listed. Neither part has a launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, compared to 11.47 TFLOPS for the AMD Radeon 8050S. The MI300 is approximately 4.17 times faster in this metric.

Q: Does the Radeon 8050S support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The Radeon 8050S includes 32 ray tracing cores. The Instinct MI300 has no ray tracing cores listed in the database.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The Instinct MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 8050S uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: How does the Radeon 8050S compare to its nearest rivals in benchmark scores?

A: The 8050S averages 62,108 across its recorded benchmarks. It is 0.3 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, and 2.5 percent behind the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56, 2.6 percent behind the AMD Radeon RX 7600M, and 2.7 percent behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP.

Q: Which GPU has the higher thermal design power?

A: The Instinct MI300 has a TDP of 600 W, while the Radeon 8050S has a TDP of 55 W. The 8050S uses no power connectors, while the MI300 requires 2x 8-pin connectors and a suggested 1000 W PSU.

Q: What graphics APIs does each GPU support?

A: The Radeon 8050S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Instinct MI300 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, and has no display outputs.