AMD Instinct MI300 vs NVIDIA H20 NVL16 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the AMD Instinct MI300 or the NVIDIA H20 NVL16. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile rank of 50 compared to all GPUs in the database. With no head-to-head benchmark results, wins and losses cannot be assigned from direct measurements. The analysis below relies entirely on the recorded specifications, clock behavior, and memory characteristics.

The raw compute figures show a clear split. The MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the H20 NVL16 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS. That places the MI300 roughly 21% ahead in single-precision work based on the recorded numbers. In FP16, the picture reverses. The MI300 lists 47.87 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, meaning the same throughput as FP32. The H20 NVL16 lists 79.07 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, doubling its FP32 rate. The H20 NVL16 leads FP16 by roughly 65% according to these figures.

Texture throughput follows the same pattern as FP32. The MI300 records 1,496.0 GTexel/s against 617.8 GTexel/s for the H20 NVL16. That is a 2.4x advantage for the AMD part in texture fill work. Pixel rate goes the other direction. The MI300 has no pixel output capability at 0 MPixel/s, while the H20 NVL16 records 47.52 GPixel/s. The H20 NVL16 is the only one of the two with any raster output stage count, listing 24 ROPs against zero for the MI300.

Clock behavior shows the NVIDIA chip running at higher frequencies. Base clock is 1830 MHz for the H20 NVL16 versus 1000 MHz for the MI300. Boost clock is 1980 MHz versus 1700 MHz. Despite the higher clocks, the H20 NVL16 has fewer shading units, 9984 against 14080, which explains the FP32 deficit. Memory clocks are close, 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective for the H20 NVL16 versus 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective for the MI300. The MI300 counters with a much wider memory bus, 8192 bit against 6144 bit, producing 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth versus 4.03 TB/s. That is a 32% bandwidth advantage for the AMD part.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the die designs diverge sharply. The MI300 uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip under the CDNA 3.0 architecture, part of the Instinct MIx generation. The H20 NVL16 uses the GH100 chip under the Hopper architecture, part of the Server Hopper Hxx generation. Transistor counts reflect the scale difference. The MI300 packs 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, giving a density of 150.4M transistors per mm². The H20 NVL16 carries 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, at 98.3M per mm². The MI300 holds nearly double the transistor count and a 25% larger die.

Compute resources differ in structure. The MI300 has 14080 shading units and 880 texture mapping units, with zero ROPs. The H20 NVL16 has 9984 shading units, 312 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The NVIDIA part additionally lists 312 tensor cores; the AMD part has no tensor core field recorded. The MI300 has no pixel rate because it lacks ROPs entirely, which fits its compute-oriented design. The H20 NVL16 retains some raster functionality despite being a server accelerator.

Memory configurations are both HBM3 but sized differently. The MI300 uses 128 GB across an 8192 bit bus, while the H20 NVL16 uses 96 GB across a 6144 bit bus. Bandwidth follows the bus width, 5.32 TB/s against 4.03 TB/s. The MI300 has a 33% capacity advantage and a 32% bandwidth advantage.

Power and physical design differ as well. The MI300 draws up to 600 W and uses two 8-pin power connectors, with a suggested 1000 W power supply. The H20 NVL16 draws 400 W, lists no power connectors because it is an SXM Module, and suggests an 800 W power supply. The MI300 is a 267 mm long, 111 mm tall PCIe card. The H20 NVL16 has no recorded dimensions, consistent with a module form factor. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 and have no display outputs. Neither supports DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan APIs in the recorded data.

Release timing separates the generations. The MI300 was released on 2023-01-03, and the H20 NVL16 on 2025-09-01. The MI300 predecessor is Radeon Instinct, while the H20 NVL16 predecessor is Server Ada and its successor is Server Blackwell. The H20 NVL16 production status is Active; the MI300 has no recorded production status.

Where Each One Wins

The MI300 wins in raw single-precision compute, texture throughput, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth. Its 47.87 TFLOPS FP32 and 1,496.0 GTexel/s texture rate suit workloads that stress general compute and texture sampling. The 128 GB HBM3 pool with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth supports large models or datasets that need to stay resident on the accelerator. The 8192 bit bus is the widest recorded between the two and directly drives the bandwidth lead.

The H20 NVL16 wins in FP16 throughput, pixel output, and power efficiency. The 79.07 TFLOPS FP16 figure at 2:1 ratio indicates a hardware path that doubles throughput for reduced-precision work. This matters for inference or training loops that can tolerate FP16. The 47.52 GPixel/s pixel rate and 24 ROPs give it raster capability that the MI300 lacks entirely. The 400 W TDP against 600 W means it draws one third less power, and the suggested 800 W PSU versus 1000 W reflects a lighter system power requirement. The higher base clock of 1830 MHz versus 1000 MHz also indicates the NVIDIA part sustains a higher operating frequency.

The tensor core presence on the H20 NVL16, 312 units, is a structural advantage for matrix-heavy operations, while the MI300 has no recorded tensor core count. The MI300 compensates with more shading units, 14080 versus 9984, and more TMUs, 880 versus 312. For workloads that scale with shader count and memory bandwidth, the MI300 leads. For workloads that scale with FP16 throughput, tensor operations, and raster output, the H20 NVL16 leads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 records 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32, which is about 21% higher than the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 at 39.54 TFLOPS.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The MI300 has 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192 bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The H20 NVL16 has 96 GB of HBM3 on a 6144 bit bus with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth. The MI300 leads in both capacity and bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has better FP16 throughput?

A: The H20 NVL16 records 79.07 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, which is about 65% higher than the MI300 at 47.87 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The MI300 has a 600 W TDP and suggests a 1000 W power supply. The H20 NVL16 has a 400 W TDP and suggests an 800 W power supply.

Q: Does either GPU support display output or standard graphics APIs?

A: Neither GPU has display outputs. Both list DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A. The H20 NVL16 does have 24 ROPs and a 47.52 GPixel/s pixel rate, while the MI300 has zero ROPs and zero pixel rate.

Q: What are the release dates?

A: The MI300 was released on 2023-01-03. The H20 NVL16 was released on 2025-09-01.

The Verdict

The data shows two accelerators aimed at different points in the compute spectrum. The MI300 is the choice when FP32 throughput, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth dominate the requirement. Its 128 GB of HBM3 and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth give it a clear lead for workloads that must keep large working sets on the accelerator. The 21% FP32 advantage and 2.4x texture rate advantage reinforce its position as a general compute workhorse.

The H20 NVL16 is the choice when FP16 throughput and lower power draw matter more. Its 79.07 TFLOPS FP16 figure is 65% higher than the MI300, and its 400 W TDP against 600 W means it fits into systems with lighter power delivery. The 312 tensor cores and 24 ROPs give it capabilities the MI300 does not record, making it suitable for reduced-precision and mixed raster-compute pipelines.

The MI300 uses a 2023 release date and a 600 W power envelope. The H20 NVL16 uses a 2025 release date, an active production status, and a 400 W envelope. Neither has benchmark scores in the database, so the verdict rests on specification comparisons only. Buyers targeting maximum FP32 and memory bandwidth should select the MI300. Buyers targeting FP16 throughput, tensor operations, and lower system power draw should select the H20 NVL16.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Instinct MI300 | NVIDIA H20 NVL16 |

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

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | GH100 |

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Hopper |

| Generation | Instinct (MIx) | Server Hopper (Hxx) |

| Process node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | 80,000 million |

| Die size | 1017 mm² | 814 mm² |

| Transistor density | 150.4M / mm² | 98.3M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1000 MHz | 1830 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1700 MHz | 1980 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1300 MHz 5.2 Gbps effective | 1313 MHz 5.3 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 128 GB | 96 GB |

| Memory bus width | 8192 bit | 6144 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 5.32 TB/s | 4.03 TB/s |

| Shading units | 14080 | 9984 |

| TMUs | 880 | 312 |

| ROPs | 0 | 24 |

| Tensor cores | null | 312 |

| Pixel rate | 0 MPixel/s | 47.52 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 1,496.0 GTexel/s | 617.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 47.87 TFLOPS | 39.54 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1) | 79.07 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 600 W | 400 W |

| Power connectors | 2x 8-pin | null |

| Suggested PSU | 1000 W | 800 W |

| Slot width | null | SXM Module |

| Dimensions | 267 mm x 111 mm | null |

| Release date | 2023-01-03 | 2025-09-01 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | Server Ada |

| Successor | null | Server Blackwell |

| Production status | null | Active |