AMD Instinct MI300 vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain any head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Instinct MI300 and the NVIDIA N1 16SM. Both processors record an average benchmark score of 0, and each sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Consequently, there are no measured wins for either part: the wins tally is 0 for the AMD Instinct MI300 and 0 for the NVIDIA N1 16SM.

The absence of recorded scores means that a direct performance comparison cannot be drawn from the measured data. What can be analyzed instead are the theoretical peak throughput figures, which are derived from the clock speeds and shader counts recorded in the database. The AMD Instinct MI300 lists a FP32 compute rate of 47.87 TFLOPS, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM lists 9.609 TFLOPS. The ratio between these figures is substantial: the AMD part indicates roughly 4.98 times the FP32 throughput of the NVIDIA part. Similarly, FP16 performance is listed at 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1) for the AMD Instinct MI300 and 9.609 TFLOPS (1:1) for the NVIDIA N1 16SM, maintaining the same multiplicative gap.

Texture processing rates differ as well. The AMD Instinct MI300 records a texture rate of 1,496.0 GTexel/s, versus 300.3 GTexel/s for the NVIDIA N1 16SM. That is approximately 4.98 times the texture throughput, which aligns with the ratio in shader count (14080 vs 2048). Pixel throughput, however, favors the NVIDIA part: the AMD Instinct MI300 lists 0 MPixel/s, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM records 56.30 GPixel/s. This reflects the differing roles of the two processors, where the AMD accelerator has no raster output units (0 ROPs) and the NVIDIA integrated graphics processor includes 24 ROPs.

Memory bandwidth is another area of separation. The AMD Instinct MI300 lists 5.32 TB/s from 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM lists 273.2 GB/s from 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus. The AMD part's bandwidth is approximately 19.5 times that of the NVIDIA part. Clock behavior also diverges: the AMD Instinct MI300 runs at a base of 1000 MHz and a boost of 1700 MHz, whereas the NVIDIA N1 16SM runs at a base of 741 MHz and a boost of 2346 MHz. The NVIDIA part's boost clock is higher by 646 MHz, but its much smaller shader count limits total throughput.

FAQ

Q: How does the FP32 compute performance compare between the AMD Instinct MI300 and the NVIDIA N1 16SM?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 lists 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM lists 9.609 TFLOPS. The AMD part's listed figure is approximately 4.98 times higher.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 lists a bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s using HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus. The NVIDIA N1 16SM lists 273.2 GB/s using LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus. The AMD part shows roughly 19.5 times the bandwidth.

Q: Do both processors support the same API set?

A: Yes, both list DirectX as N/A, OpenGL as N/A, and Vulkan as N/A in the database.

Q: What is the difference in transistor count?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 records 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die. The NVIDIA N1 16SM lists its transistor count as unknown, with a die size of 382 mm².

Q: Which processor has more shading units?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 has 14,080 shading units, compared to 2,048 shading units for the NVIDIA N1 16SM.

Q: Are there any head-to-head benchmark wins for either processor?

A: No. The database records 0 wins for the AMD Instinct MI300 and 0 wins for the NVIDIA N1 16SM, and neither has any individual benchmark scores.

Architecture Differences

The two processors sit in different architectural families. The AMD Instinct MI300 uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture with a chip codenamed Aqua Vanjaram, belonging to the Instinct (MIx) generation. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a chip codenamed GB20B, belonging to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 5 nm process, per the database.

The compute resources diverge sharply. The AMD Instinct MI300 lists 14,080 shading units, 880 texture mapping units, and 0 raster output units. It has no dedicated ray tracing cores and no tensor cores listed. The NVIDIA N1 16SM lists 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units. It includes 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, which the AMD part does not record.

Memory subsystems are built on different technologies. The AMD Instinct MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and a bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s. Its memory clock is listed at 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus and a bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s. Its memory clock is listed at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective. The effective data rate is higher on the NVIDIA part, but the bus width is far narrower.

Clock behavior differs as well. The AMD Instinct MI300 has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1700 MHz. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The NVIDIA part's boost is higher, but the AMD part's base is higher. The AMD Instinct MI300 records a texture rate of 1,496.0 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The NVIDIA N1 16SM records a texture rate of 300.3 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 56.30 GPixel/s.

Physical packaging is also different. The AMD Instinct MI300 has a die size of 1017 mm² with 153,000 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The NVIDIA N1 16SM has a die size of 382 mm², with transistor count listed as unknown. The AMD part is a discrete accelerator with dimensions of 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, requiring 2x 8-pin power connectors and a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The NVIDIA part is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no dimensions listed and no power connectors required. The AMD Instinct MI300 has no display outputs, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM has 1x HDMI output.

Power consumption is not fully comparable because the NVIDIA N1 16SM lists its TDP as unknown, while the AMD Instinct MI300 lists 600 W. Both use a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. The AMD part was released on 2023-01-03, and the NVIDIA part on 2026-05-31. The production status for the NVIDIA N1 16SM is Active, while the AMD Instinct MI300 has no production status listed.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the AMD Instinct MI300 and the NVIDIA N1 16SM are not competing in the same role. The AMD Instinct MI300 is a high-throughput accelerator with 14,080 shading units, 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, and 5.32 TB/s of memory bandwidth. The NVIDIA N1 16SM is an integrated graphics processor with 2,048 shading units, 9.609 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, and 273.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The AMD part leads decisively in compute throughput, texture rate, and memory bandwidth by wide margins: roughly 4.98 times in FP32, 4.98 times in texture rate, and 19.5 times in memory bandwidth.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM holds advantages in specific areas. Its pixel rate is 56.30 GPixel/s versus 0 MPixel/s for the AMD part, which reflects the AMD part's absence of raster output units. The NVIDIA part also includes 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, neither of which the AMD part lists. Its boost clock of 2346 MHz is higher than the AMD part's 1700 MHz, and it offers a display output (1x HDMI) where the AMD part has none.

For compute-oriented workloads that rely on FP32 or FP16 throughput and massive memory bandwidth, the recorded data points to the AMD Instinct MI300 as the stronger part. For tasks that require rasterization, ray tracing, tensor operations, or display output, the NVIDIA N1 16SM has the relevant hardware blocks and the AMD part does not. The absence of head-to-head benchmark results means that actual application performance cannot be confirmed from the database; only the theoretical specifications can be compared. Users should select based on which hardware features match their workload, as the two parts are architecturally distinct and do not overlap in capability.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the AMD Instinct MI300 and the NVIDIA N1 16SM in the database.

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI300 | NVIDIA N1 16SM |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | GB20B |

| Generation | Instinct (MIx) | Blackwell IGP (N1x) |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1700 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1300 MHz 5.2 Gbps effective | 1067 MHz 8.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Type | HBM3 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 5.32 TB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 14080 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 880 | 128 |

| ROPs | 0 | 24 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | null | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 56.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,496.0 GTexel/s | 300.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 47.87 TFLOPS | 9.609 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1) | 9.609 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 600 W | unknown |

| Slot Width | null | IGP |

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

| Suggested PSU | 1000 W | null |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI |

| Dimensions | 267 mm 10.5 inches length, 111 mm 4.4 inches height | null |

| Production Status | null | Active |

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2026-05-31 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | null |