AMD Instinct MI300 vs AMD Radeon 880M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Instinct MI300 and the AMD Radeon 880M occupy entirely different segments of the GPU spectrum, and the recorded data reflects this starkly. The MI300 is a data center accelerator with no conventional benchmark entries in the database, while the 880M is an integrated graphics processor with a full suite of measured tests. This asymmetry means a direct score-by-score comparison is impossible; instead, the data must be read through the lens of architectural intent and the 880M's standing among its peers.

The Radeon 880M delivers an average benchmark score of 8,436 across its test suite, placing it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database show how tightly clustered this performance tier is. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX scores 8,427, a delta of just 0.1 percent, meaning the 880M is essentially neck-and-neck with that older discrete mobile part. The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 scores 8,458, putting the 880M 0.3 percent behind, while the AMD Radeon HD 8870M also scores 8,462, again a 0.3 percent deficit. The AMD Radeon R9 M375X scores 8,325, which the 880M beats by 1.3 percent. These deltas are all within a couple of points, indicating that the integrated 880M trades blows with a specific class of entry-level discrete GPUs from previous generations.

Looking at individual workloads, the 880M shows a clear peak in the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 40,006, far outpacing its OpenCL result of 31,285. That Vulkan advantage suggests the RDNA 3.5 architecture handles modern low-level graphics APIs particularly well. In the Passmark suite, the G3D score of 7,615 dwarfs the compute score of 3,719, indicating that the 880M is tuned more for rasterized rendering tasks than for raw compute throughput. The DirectX 9 legacy test returns 97, the DirectX 11 test returns 73, and both DirectX 10 and DirectX 12 return 31 and 32 respectively, showing a regression in performance on newer API paths. The G2D score of 969 reflects modest 2D throughput.

For the MI300, the database records zero benchmark scores and a percentile of 50, with no nearest rivals listed. Its average benchmark score is 0, which does not indicate poor performance but rather the absence of standardized consumer benchmark data. The FP32 throughput of 47.87 TFLOPS and FP16 throughput of 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1) place it in an entirely different computational class from the 880M's 4.454 TFLOPS in both precisions. The MI300 delivers 10.75 times the FP32 compute of the 880M, a figure derived directly from the recorded specifications. Texture rate tells a similar story: the MI300's 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus the 880M's 139.2 GTexel/s represents a 10.75-fold difference, while pixel rate is inverted, with the MI300 recording 0 MPixel/s and the 880M delivering 46.40 GPixel/s. The MI300 has no ROPs, explaining its zero pixel rate, while the 880M has 16 ROPs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share a manufacturer but diverge completely in design philosophy. The Instinct MI300 uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Radeon 880M uses RDNA 3.5 on the Strix Point chip, built on a 4 nm process, also at TSMC. Both are TSMC products, but the node difference is meaningful: the MI300 packs 153,000 million transistors into a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per square millimeter. The 880M contains 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die, with a density of 145.9 million per square millimeter. The MI300 is a monolithic monster designed for maximum compute density, while the 880M is an integrated GPU sharing a die with a CPU on the Strix Point mobile platform.

The compute resource disparity is enormous. The MI300 deploys 14,080 shading units and 880 texture mapping units, but zero ROPs. The 880M uses 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, and it also carries 12 ray tracing cores, a feature class entirely absent from the MI300's CDNA design. The MI300 has no RT cores listed, reinforcing its role as a compute accelerator rather than a graphics renderer. The 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI300 records no graphics API support at all, consistent with its lack of display outputs.

Memory architecture separates the two further. The MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The 880M uses system shared memory, with its bus width and bandwidth listed as system dependent. The MI300's memory clock is 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective transfer, while the 880M's memory clock is simply system shared. The MI300 draws 600 W under its TDP and requires dual 8-pin power connectors with a suggested 1000 W power supply, while the 880M has a 15 W TDP, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU, fitting its mobile integrated design.

Clock behavior also differs sharply. The MI300 runs at a 1000 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost, while the 880M runs at a 400 MHz base and 2900 MHz boost. The 880M's 2900 MHz boost is substantially higher, a consequence of its smaller, more power-efficient RDNA 3.5 design. The MI300 compensates with sheer width and memory bandwidth. The process node difference, 5 nm versus 4 nm, allows the 880M to hit higher clocks despite its lower power envelope. The MI300's 1017 mm² die is over four times larger than the 880M's 233 mm² die, and its transistor count is 4.5 times higher. The MI300 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the 880M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, reflecting the former's need for maximum host bandwidth in server environments.

FAQ

Q: Why does the AMD Instinct MI300 have no benchmark scores in the database?

A: The database records no benchmark entries for the MI300, with an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile of 50. This reflects the absence of standardized consumer benchmark data for a data center accelerator, not a performance measurement. The 880M, by contrast, has ten recorded benchmark scores across 3DMark, Geekbench, and Passmark tests.

Q: How does the Radeon 880M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 880M scores 8,436 on average, placing it 0.1 percent ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8,427), 0.3 percent behind the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8,458), 0.3 percent behind the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8,462), and 1.3 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 M375X (8,325). These are all within a narrow band of roughly one percent.

Q: Does the MI300 support graphics rendering?

A: No. The MI300 has no display outputs, no ROPs, a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, and no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API support recorded. It is designed for compute workloads, as indicated by its 47.87 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 throughput and 5.32 TB/s memory bandwidth.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two?

A: The MI300 has a TDP of 600 W with 2x 8-pin power connectors and a suggested 1000 W power supply. The 880M has a TDP of 15 W, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU, reflecting its integrated mobile design.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The 880M has a boost clock of 2900 MHz compared to the MI300's 1700 MHz. The 880M also has a lower base clock of 400 MHz versus the MI300's 1000 MHz. The higher boost on the 880M comes from its smaller 4 nm die and lower power target.

Q: How do memory configurations differ?

A: The MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The 880M uses system shared memory, with capacity, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent or system shared.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every recorded field. The MI300 uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, while the 880M uses RDNA 3.5 on the Strix Point chip. The process nodes differ: 5 nm for the MI300, 4 nm for the 880M. Transistor counts are 153,000 million versus 34,000 million, and die sizes are 1017 mm² versus 233 mm². Transistor density is close but not identical: 150.4 million per mm² for the MI300, 145.9 million per mm² for the 880M.

Base clocks are 1000 MHz for the MI300 and 400 MHz for the 880M. Boost clocks are 1700 MHz and 2900 MHz respectively. Memory differs completely: 128 GB HBM3 with 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth on the MI300, versus system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth on the 880M. Memory clocks are 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) versus system shared.

Shader resources: 14,080 shading units and 880 TMUs on the MI300 versus 768 shading units and 48 TMUs on the 880M. ROPs are 0 for the MI300 and 16 for the 880M. The 880M has 12 ray tracing cores; the MI300 has none recorded. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s versus 46.40 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus 139.2 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 are 47.87 TFLOPS versus 4.454 TFLOPS, both at 1:1 ratios.

TDP is 600 W versus 15 W. Power connectors are 2x 8-pin versus none. The suggested PSU is 1000 W for the MI300, none for the 880M. Bus interfaces are PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are none versus portable device dependent. API support is N/A across the board for the MI300, while the 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300 measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the 880M has no recorded dimensions. The MI300 has no production status, while the 880M is listed as active. Release dates are 2023-01-03 for the MI300 and 2024-07-14 for the 880M. Predecessors are Radeon Instinct and Navi II IGP respectively.

Where Each One Wins

The MI300 wins decisively in raw compute throughput. Its 47.87 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 figures, 1,496.0 GTexel/s texture rate, and 5.32 TB/s memory bandwidth position it for dense calculation workloads. The 128 GB HBM3 capacity on an 8192-bit bus allows it to hold and process datasets far beyond what an integrated GPU can address. The 600 W power envelope and dual 8-pin connectors indicate a design meant for sustained, high-intensity operation in server racks. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provides maximum host connectivity. The absence of display outputs and graphics API support confirms that its wins are in compute domains, not rendering.

The 880M wins in graphics and mobile integration. Its 16 ROPs and 46.40 GPixel/s pixel rate enable actual display output, and its 12 ray tracing cores support modern rendering effects that the MI300 cannot execute. The DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 API support make it a functional graphics solution for portable devices. The 2900 MHz boost clock is the highest clock speed recorded across both parts, and the 15 W TDP means it operates within mobile thermal constraints. Its 4 nm process node and smaller die allow for integration into the Strix Point chip. The 880M's benchmark results, particularly the 40,006 Geekbench Vulkan score, show it handles contemporary graphics APIs effectively for its class, trading within one percent of several discrete mobile GPUs from prior generations.

The use cases split cleanly. The MI300 serves compute acceleration, where its massive shading unit count, 128 GB HBM3 frame buffer, and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth address workloads that require both high throughput and large memory capacity. The 880M serves mobile graphics, where its ray tracing support, display outputs, and 15 W power draw make it suitable for integrated use in portable systems. The database records no head-to-head benchmarks between the two, and no wins for either in direct competition, because they target entirely different market segments. The MI300's zero pixel rate and lack of API support make it unsuitable for graphics tasks, while the 880M's system shared memory and 4.454 TFLOPS compute make it unsuitable for the MI300's intended workloads.