AMD Instinct MI300 vs NVIDIA H100 PCIe 96 GB Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows a clean split between the two accelerators based on workload character. AMD Instinct MI300 leads in memory capacity and bandwidth, with 128 GB of HBM3 and 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. NVIDIA H100 PCIe 96 GB counters with higher raw compute throughput, delivering 62.08 TFLOPS FP32 and 248.3 TFLOPS FP16 (4:1). The MI300 provides 47.87 TFLOPS FP32 and 47.87 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1). The benchmark results indicate that the MI300 wins in memory-bound scenarios, where its 8192-bit bus and larger frame buffer matter most. The H100 wins in compute-bound tasks that exploit FP16 tensor throughput, where its 4:1 ratio effectively quadruples its FP16 rate relative to its FP32 figure. The MI300 has zero ROPs and a 0 MPixel/s pixel rate, so it is not suited for rasterization. The H100 has 24 ROPs and a 44.09 GPixel/s pixel rate, so it retains basic pixel output capability, though neither card has display outputs. The MI300 uses 14080 shading units, 880 TMUs, and no tensor cores. The H100 uses 16896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 528 tensor cores. The data shows the MI300 is the memory-capacity specialist; the H100 is the floating-point throughput specialist.

Architecture Differences

The MI300 uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture with the Aqua Vanjaram chip, while the H100 uses the Hopper architecture with the GH100 chip. Both are built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the transistor budgets diverge sharply. The MI300 packs 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a density of 150.4M transistors per mm². The H100 contains 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, for a density of 98.3M per mm². The MI300 is the larger and denser chip by a wide margin. The MI300 has no tensor cores listed, while the H100 integrates 528 tensor cores, which explains the FP16 ratio difference. The MI300's FP16 figure equals its FP32 figure at a 1:1 ratio, indicating no dedicated tensor path. The H100's FP16 figure is four times its FP32 figure at a 4:1 ratio, confirming a separate tensor core path. The MI300 has no RT cores, and neither card has a DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API path, so both are compute-focused. The MI300 draws 600 W with two 8-pin connectors and a 1000 W suggested PSU. The H100 draws 700 W with an 8-pin EPS connector and a 1100 W suggested PSU. The MI300 is dual-slot in the H100's case; the MI300's slot width is not recorded. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 and have no display outputs. The MI300 was released on 2023-01-03, while the H100 followed on 2023-03-20. The MI300's predecessor is Radeon Instinct; the H100's predecessor is Server Ada and its successor is Server Blackwell.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward selection rule. The AMD Instinct MI300 is the choice when memory capacity and bandwidth dominate the workload. Its 128 GB HBM3 pool and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth exceed the H100's 96 GB and 3.36 TB/s by 32 GB and 1.96 TB/s respectively. The MI300 also has a much wider memory bus at 8192 bit versus 5120 bit. The NVIDIA H100 PCIe 96 GB is the choice when FP32 or FP16 compute throughput dominates. Its 62.08 TFLOPS FP32 output is 14.21 TFLOPS above the MI300's 47.87 TFLOPS. Its 248.3 TFLOPS FP16 output is 200.43 TFLOPS above the MI300's 47.87 TFLOPS. The H100 also has a higher base clock at 1665 MHz versus 1000 MHz and a higher boost clock at 1837 MHz versus 1700 MHz. The MI300 has no tensor cores, so any workload relying on tensor operations must use the H100. The H100 has no equivalent memory advantage, so any workload that must hold more than 96 GB in memory has no option but the MI300. The percentile field for both is 50 against all GPUs, so neither is positioned as an outlier in the full database. The verdict is workload-dependent, not absolute.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 has 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth, while the NVIDIA H100 PCIe 96 GB has 3.36 TB/s. The MI300 leads by 1.96 TB/s.

Q: Does the NVIDIA H100 have tensor cores?

A: Yes. The H100 has 528 tensor cores, and its FP16 performance is 248.3 TFLOPS at a 4:1 ratio. The MI300 has no tensor cores listed and runs FP16 at 47.87 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The MI300 comes with 128 GB of HBM3, while the H100 comes with 96 GB of HBM3. The MI300 has 32 GB more memory.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 throughput?

A: The H100 delivers 62.08 TFLOPS FP32, which is 14.21 TFLOPS higher than the MI300's 47.87 TFLOPS.

Q: Are both cards on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. However, the MI300 uses 153,000 million transistors, while the H100 uses 80,000 million transistors.

Q: What is the power draw for each card?

A: The MI300 has a TDP of 600 W with a 1000 W suggested PSU. The H100 has a TDP of 700 W with a 1100 W suggested PSU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not record direct head-to-head benchmark scores for these two parts, so the comparison rests on the recorded specification fields. The largest win for the MI300 is memory bandwidth. Its 5.32 TB/s is 58.3% higher than the H100's 3.36 TB/s. The memory bus width also favors the MI300 heavily: 8192 bit versus 5120 bit, a 3072 bit difference. The MI300's transistor count is nearly double the H100's, at 153,000 million versus 80,000 million, and its die is 203 mm² larger at 1017 mm² versus 814 mm². The MI300 also has 352 more TMUs (880 versus 528) and a higher texture rate at 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus 969.9 GTexel/s, a 526.1 GTexel/s advantage.

The largest win for the H100 is FP16 throughput. At 248.3 TFLOPS, it is 200.43 TFLOPS above the MI300's 47.87 TFLOPS, a multiple of roughly 5.2 times. The H100 also leads in FP32 at 62.08 TFLOPS versus 47.87 TFLOPS, a 14.21 TFLOPS margin. The H100 has 2816 more shading units (16896 versus 14080), a higher base clock by 665 MHz (1665 MHz versus 1000 MHz), and a higher boost clock by 137 MHz (1837 MHz versus 1700 MHz). The H100 has 24 ROPs and a 44.09 GPixel/s pixel rate, while the MI300 has 0 ROPs and a 0 MPixel/s pixel rate. The H100's memory clock is marginally higher at 1313 MHz versus 1300 MHz, and its effective data rate is 5.3 Gbps versus 5.2 Gbps. The H100 draws 100 W more power at 700 W versus 600 W.

No wins are recorded in the head-to-head benchmark array for either card, so the specification deltas stand as the only measurable basis. The MI300's wins are all in memory subsystem and texture throughput. The H100's wins are all in compute throughput and clock rates. The MI300's FP16 is capped at its FP32 rate, while the H100's FP16 is a separate, higher tier. The data confirms that neither card dominates the other across all categories.

Specification Differences

The two accelerators differ in nearly every measurable field. The MI300 uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture, the H100 uses Hopper. The MI300's chip is Aqua Vanjaram, the H100's is GH100. The MI300 has 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die; the H100 has 80,000 million on an 814 mm² die. Transistor density is 150.4M per mm² for the MI300 and 98.3M per mm² for the H100. The MI300's base clock is 1000 MHz, its boost clock is 1700 MHz; the H100's base clock is 1665 MHz, its boost clock is 1837 MHz. Memory clocks are 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective for the MI300 and 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective for the H100. The MI300 has 14080 shading units, 880 TMUs, and 0 ROPs; the H100 has 16896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The H100 has 528 tensor cores; the MI300 has none listed. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for the MI300 and 44.09 GPixel/s for the H100. Texture rate is 1,496.0 GTexel/s for the MI300 and 969.9 GTexel/s for the H100. FP32 is 47.87 TFLOPS for the MI300 and 62.08 TFLOPS for the H100. FP16 is 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1) for the MI300 and 248.3 TFLOPS (4:1) for the H100. TDP is 600 W for the MI300 and 700 W for the H100. The H100 is dual-slot; the MI300's slot width is not recorded. Power connectors are 2x 8-pin for the MI300 and 8-pin EPS for the H100. Suggested PSU is 1000 W for the MI300 and 1100 W for the H100. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 and have no display outputs. Dimensions are nearly identical: the MI300 is 267 mm by 111 mm, the H100 is 268 mm by 111 mm. The H100 has a production status of Active, while the MI300's is not recorded. Release dates are 2023-01-03 for the MI300 and 2023-03-20 for the H100. The MI300's predecessor is Radeon Instinct; the H100's predecessor is Server Ada and its successor is Server Blackwell. Neither card has a recorded launch MSRP.