AMD Instinct MI300 vs AMD Radeon RX 7600S Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300 and the AMD Radeon RX 7600S are fundamentally different products, and the recorded data reflects that divergence. The MI300 is an accelerator with no display outputs, built for compute workloads, while the RX 7600S is a mobile graphics processor with full rendering and API support. The database shows the RX 7600S holds all recorded benchmark wins because it is the only one with benchmark entries. The MI300 has no benchmark scores in the database, giving it a percentile rank of 50 among all GPUs, while the RX 7600S sits at the 60th percentile.

The RX 7600S wins across every measured test category, from DirectX 9 through DirectX 12, plus OpenCL, Vulkan, and Passmark compute tests. Its strongest recorded result is in Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 73868, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 68012. The Passmark G3D score of 15408 and the Passmark G2D score of 776 indicate solid rasterization performance for mobile use. The DirectX 12 score of 65 and DirectX 11 score of 140 show the card handles modern API workloads, while the DirectX 9 score of 211 demonstrates legacy compatibility.

The MI300, by contrast, has zero recorded benchmarks and an average benchmark score of 0. Its absence from the benchmark suite means the database cannot quantify its wins. However, its raw specifications suggest it targets a different domain entirely. The MI300 offers 14080 shading units, 880 texture mapping units, and a texture rate of 1496.0 GTexel/s, compared to the RX 7600S with 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 246.4 GTexel/s. The MI300 also delivers 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 (1:1) performance, versus the RX 7600S at 15.77 TFLOPS FP32 and 31.54 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). Where the RX 7600S wins in benchmark scores, the MI300 wins in raw compute throughput, though the database lacks direct head-to-head measurements.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families. The MI300 uses CDNA 3.0, AMD's compute-optimized architecture, built on the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The RX 7600S uses RDNA 3.0, a graphics-first architecture, on the Navi 33 chip with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. The MI300 belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation, while the RX 7600S is part of the Radeon RX 7000 series, specifically the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation.

Manufacturing processes differ significantly. The MI300 is fabbed on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The RX 7600S uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, for a density of 65.2M per mm². The MI300 packs over ten times the transistor count and nearly five times the die area, reflecting its accelerator-class design.

Memory architecture is another major split. The MI300 carries 128 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7600S has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s. That is a 20.8x difference in bus width and a 20.8x difference in bandwidth, though the MI300's memory clock runs at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) versus the RX 7600S at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The RX 7600S uses faster memory per pin, but the MI300's massive bus width dominates total bandwidth.

The RX 7600S includes features the MI300 lacks entirely. It has 64 ROPs, 28 ray tracing cores, and a pixel rate of 140.8 GPixel/s. The MI300 reports 0 ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, meaning it cannot rasterize traditional graphics. The MI300 also lists no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, while the RX 7600S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Clock behavior differs too: the MI300 runs at a base of 1000 MHz and boost of 1700 MHz, while the RX 7600S has a base of 1500 MHz, boost of 2200 MHz, and a game clock of 1865 MHz.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the MI300 and RX 7600S. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and the win counts are zero for both sides. All recorded benchmark scores belong exclusively to the RX 7600S, so the comparison must rely on its absolute scores and the MI300's absence from testing.

The RX 7600S posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 68012 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 73868. These represent the highest recorded values in its benchmark set. In Passmark tests, the G3D score of 15408 indicates the strongest overall graphics performance, while the GPU compute score of 6520 shows parallel processing capability. The DirectX tests are lower in raw numbers: 211 for DirectX 9, 140 for DirectX 11, 74 for DirectX 10, and 65 for DirectX 12. The G2D score of 776 reflects 2D rendering performance.

The MI300 has no scores to compare directly. Its average benchmark score is 0, and its percentile rank of 50 puts it below the RX 7600S's 60th percentile. However, the MI300's raw compute specifications exceed the RX 7600S in every throughput metric. The MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS FP32 versus 15.77 TFLOPS for the RX 7600S, a 3.0x advantage. In FP16, the MI300 again delivers 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1), while the RX 7600S reaches 31.54 TFLOPS (2:1), a 1.5x gap. Texture rate favors the MI300 at 1496.0 GTexel/s versus 246.4 GTexel/s, a 6.1x difference.

The RX 7600S does hold one clear architectural win: it has 64 ROPs and a pixel rate of 140.8 GPixel/s, where the MI300 has zero ROPs and zero pixel output. For any workload requiring rasterization, the RX 7600S is the only option. The MI300's 128 GB of HBM3 memory with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth dwarfs the RX 7600S's 8 GB GDDR6 at 256.0 GB/s, but that memory exists for compute, not display.

Nearest rival data for the RX 7600S puts its performance in context. The NVIDIA T400 4 GB scores 16792 on average, which is 0.6% above the RX 7600S's average of 16696. The NVIDIA T400 scores 16508, 1.1% below. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 scores 16504, 1.2% below, and the NVIDIA Tesla M4 scores 16932, 1.4% above. These tight deltas indicate the RX 7600S sits in a competitive mid-range mobile segment, though no equivalent rival data exists for the MI300.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear split in purpose. The AMD Instinct MI300 is a compute accelerator with no display outputs, no rasterization hardware, and no API support. Its strengths lie in raw throughput: 47.87 TFLOPS FP32, 5.32 TB/s memory bandwidth, and 128 GB of HBM3. The AMD Radeon RX 7600S is a mobile graphics processor with full rendering capabilities, including 64 ROPs, 28 ray tracing cores, and API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

For graphics workloads, the RX 7600S is the only choice between the two. It has all the recorded benchmark scores, a 60th percentile rank, and an average benchmark score of 16696. Its nearest rivals sit within 1.4% of that score, confirming it is a mainstream mobile part. The MI300 cannot run any of those tests, as shown by its zero benchmark entries and 50th percentile rank.

For compute-heavy tasks, the MI300's specifications indicate far higher capacity. Its 14080 shading units, 880 TMUs, and 150.4M transistors per mm² density suggest it is built for large-scale parallel processing. The RX 7600S's 1792 shading units and 112 TMUs are modest by comparison. The MI300 also uses a 5 nm process versus 6 nm, and its 1017 mm² die is nearly five times larger.

The launch dates are identical: both released on 2023-01-03. The MI300 succeeds the Radeon Instinct, while the RX 7600S succeeds Polaris Mobile. Neither has a successor listed, and neither has a launch MSRP in the database. The MI300 carries a 600 W TDP with 2x 8-pin power connectors and a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The RX 7600S has a 75 W TDP, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU, fitting its integrated mobile design.

The verdict depends entirely on workload. The RX 7600S wins every recorded benchmark and is the only one with any measured performance. The MI300 wins on paper in compute metrics but has no benchmark evidence in the database. For anyone needing a GPU for gaming, rendering, or general graphics, the RX 7600S is the functional option. For anyone needing an accelerator for data-center scale compute, the MI300's specifications point to that role, but the absence of benchmark data means its real-world performance cannot be confirmed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has better benchmark scores?

A: The RX 7600S holds all recorded benchmarks. Its highest scores are 73868 in Geekbench Vulkan and 68012 in Geekbench OpenCL. The MI300 has no benchmark scores in the database.

Q: What is the memory capacity of each?

A: The MI300 has 128 GB of HBM3 memory with a 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7600S has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: The RX 7600S has 28 ray tracing cores. The MI300 has no ray tracing cores listed.

Q: Which GPU has display outputs?

A: The RX 7600S has display outputs described as portable device dependent. The MI300 has no outputs.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The MI300 has a 600 W TDP with 2x 8-pin power connectors and a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The RX 7600S has a 75 W TDP with no power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has better API support?

A: The RX 7600S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300 has no API support listed for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI300 | AMD Radeon RX 7600S |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | 13,300 million |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 204 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | 65.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1700 MHz | 2200 MHz |

| Memory Size | 128 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 5.32 TB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 14080 | 1792 |

| Texture Mapping Units | 880 | 112 |

| Raster Operations Units | 0 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | Not listed | 28 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 140.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,496.0 GTexel/s | 246.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 47.87 TFLOPS | 15.77 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1) | 31.54 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 600 W | 75 W |

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

| Suggested PSU | 1000 W | Not listed |

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

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| OpenGL Support | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan Support | N/A | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | 267 mm x 111 mm | Not listed |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | Polaris Mobile |