AMD Instinct MI300 vs NVIDIA RTX 6000D Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the AMD Instinct MI300 shows no individual benchmark scores, and the average benchmark score is listed as zero. This places the MI300 at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, a position that reflects the absence of measured performance entries rather than a direct performance statement. In contrast, the NVIDIA RTX 6000D has two recorded benchmark results. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RTX 6000D scores 3522. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scores 388405. The average benchmark score for the RTX 6000D is 195964, which places it at the 98th percentile among all GPUs. The difference between these two products in terms of available benchmark data is absolute: the MI300 has no entries in the head-to-head benchmark category, and the win count for the MI300 is zero, while the win count for the RTX 6000D is also zero. The head-to-head benchmark list itself is empty, meaning no direct comparison tests were recorded.

The nearest rivals for the RTX 6000D provide context for its average score. The NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB has an average score of 194415, which is 0.8% lower than the RTX 6000D. The NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB averages 187147, a 4.7% deficit. The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB posts a higher average of 207124, putting it 5.4% ahead of the RTX 6000D. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation averages 184664, trailing the RTX 6000D by 6.1%. These deltas show the RTX 6000D sits in a competitive band, slightly above some older accelerators but below the A100 PCIe 80 GB in aggregate scoring.

Given that the MI300 has no benchmark scores, no direct numerical comparison can be drawn between the two cards. The data indicates the RTX 6000D is a measured performer with a clear position in the database, while the MI300 remains a specification-only entry. The FP32 throughput figures do offer a theoretical comparison: the MI300 lists 47.87 TFLOPS, while the RTX 6000D lists 97.04 TFLOPS. This is a 102.7% higher FP32 figure for the NVIDIA card, though this is a computed specification difference, not a benchmark result. Similarly, FP16 performance shows the same pattern, with the MI300 at 47.87 TFLOPS and the RTX 6000D at 97.04 TFLOPS. The texture rate favors the RTX 6000D slightly, at 1,516.3 GTexel/s versus 1,496.0 GTexel/s for the MI300, a marginal 1.4% advantage. The pixel rate is a stark contrast: the MI300 lists 0 MPixel/s, while the RTX 6000D delivers 466.6 GPixel/s.

Where Each One Wins

The MI300 wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. It carries 128 GB of HBM3 memory across a 8192-bit bus, yielding 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 6000D offers 84 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 448-bit bus, with 1.40 TB/s of bandwidth. The MI300's memory bandwidth is 3.8 times higher, and its capacity is 52.4% greater. These figures indicate the MI300 is designed for workloads where massive datasets reside on-card, such as large model inference or high-capacity data processing. The RTX 6000D, with less memory but higher clocked GDDR7, targets a different balance.

The RTX 6000D wins in raw compute and feature support. Its FP32 and FP16 figures double those of the MI300. It also includes 156 ray tracing cores and 624 tensor cores, while the MI300 lists no RT or tensor core counts. The RTX 6000D supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the MI300 lists N/A for all three APIs. The RTX 6000D has 4x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs, while the MI300 has no display outputs. The MI300's shading unit count is 14080, lower than the RTX 6000D's 19968, yet the MI300 has more texture mapping units, 880 versus 624. The MI300 has zero ROPs, while the RTX 6000D has 192. This suggests the MI300 is not intended for rasterization tasks, while the RTX 6000D has full graphics pipeline capability.

The MI300 uses a 5 nm process with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The RTX 6000D also uses a 5 nm process but packs 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, with a density of 122.9M per mm². The MI300's die is 35.6% larger and holds 65.9% more transistors. Clock speeds differ notably: the MI300 has a base of 1000 MHz and a boost of 1700 MHz, while the RTX 6000D operates at 1992 MHz base and 2430 MHz boost. The NVIDIA card's boost clock is 42.9% higher.

The Verdict

The data does not support a performance verdict between these two cards because no direct benchmarks exist for the MI300. The RTX 6000D is a fully measured product with an average score of 195964, placing it at the 98th percentile. Its nearest rival comparisons show it is competitive with older data center parts, slightly ahead of the Tesla V100S and A100 SXM4, and behind the A100 PCIe 80 GB. The MI300's lack of any benchmark entries means the database treats it as an unmeasured product, and its 50th percentile position is a default value, not an empirical result.

For compute workloads, the RTX 6000D's FP32 and FP16 figures are double those of the MI300. The RTX 6000D also delivers a full graphics feature set, including ray tracing, tensor cores, and modern API support. The MI300 counters with a much larger memory pool and higher bandwidth, which could matter for memory-bound tasks. The MI300's zero ROPs and no display outputs confirm it is a compute-only accelerator, whereas the RTX 6000D can also drive displays and handle graphics pipelines.

The RTX 6000D has a launch MSRP of 8,565 USD. The MI300 has no launch MSRP listed. The RTX 6000D was released on 2025-07-13, while the MI300 was released on 2023-01-03. The RTX 6000D's production status is Active; the MI300's is not specified. The RTX 6000D is a dual-slot card measuring 304 mm in length, 137 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The MI300 measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, with no width listed. The RTX 6000D uses a single 16-pin power connector, while the MI300 uses two 8-pin connectors. Both cards list a suggested PSU of 1000 W and a TDP of 600 W.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 6000D lists 97.04 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Instinct MI300 lists 47.87 TFLOPS. The RTX 6000D figure is double that of the MI300.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The MI300 has 128 GB of HBM3 with a 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 6000D has 84 GB of GDDR7 with a 448-bit bus and 1.40 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does either card support display outputs?

A: The RTX 6000D has 4x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. The MI300 has no display outputs.

Q: What is the transistor count for each chip?

A: The MI300 has 153,000 million transistors, while the RTX 6000D has 92,200 million transistors. Both use a 5 nm process from TSMC.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores for the MI300?

A: The database lists no benchmark scores for the MI300. Its average benchmark score is 0, and its percentile is 50. The RTX 6000D has an average score of 195964 at the 98th percentile.

Q: What APIs does each card support?

A: The RTX 6000D supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Architecture Differences

The MI300 uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip based on CDNA 3.0 architecture, part of the Instinct (MIx) generation. The RTX 6000D uses the GB202 chip based on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, part of the Blackwell PRO W (x000) generation. The MI300 belongs to the AMD Instinct line, while the RTX 6000D is in the GeForce 60-series. The MI300's predecessor is Radeon Instinct, and the RTX 6000D's predecessor is Workstation Ada. Neither has a listed successor.

The MI300 has 14080 shading units, 880 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. It has no RT cores and no tensor cores listed. The RTX 6000D has 19968 shading units, 624 TMUs, and 192 ROPs. It has 156 RT cores and 624 tensor cores. The MI300's texture rate is 1,496.0 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s. The RTX 6000D's texture rate is 1,516.3 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate is 466.6 GPixel/s.

The MI300's memory clock is 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective speed, using HBM3. The RTX 6000D's memory clock is 1560 MHz with 25 Gbps effective speed, using GDDR7. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 interfaces. The MI300 has a base clock of 1000 MHz and boost of 1700 MHz. The RTX 6000D has a base clock of 1992 MHz and boost of 2430 MHz. The MI300 is 267 mm long and 111 mm tall, while the RTX 6000D is 304 mm long, 137 mm tall, and 40 mm wide.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measured specification. Memory size: 128 GB versus 84 GB. Memory type: HBM3 versus GDDR7. Bus width: 8192 bit versus 448 bit. Bandwidth: 5.32 TB/s versus 1.40 TB/s. Shading units: 14080 versus 19968. TMUs: 880 versus 624. ROPs: 0 versus 192. RT cores: none versus 156. Tensor cores: none versus 624. Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s versus 466.6 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus 1,516.3 GTexel/s. FP32: 47.87 TFLOPS versus 97.04 TFLOPS. FP16: 47.87 TFLOPS versus 97.04 TFLOPS.

Transistor count: 153,000 million versus 92,200 million. Die size: 1017 mm² versus 750 mm². Transistor density: 150.4M per mm² versus 122.9M per mm². Base clock: 1000 MHz versus 1992 MHz. Boost clock: 1700 MHz versus 2430 MHz. Memory clock: 1300 MHz versus 1560 MHz. Power connectors: 2x 8-pin versus 1x 16-pin. Slot width: not listed versus dual-slot. Display outputs: none versus 4x DisplayPort 2.1b. API support: N/A versus DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4. Dimensions: 267 mm by 111 mm versus 304 mm by 137 mm by 40 mm. Release date: 2023-01-03 versus 2025-07-13. Production status: not listed versus Active. Launch MSRP: not listed versus 8,565 USD.

Both cards share a 5 nm process, TSMC foundry, 600 W TDP, 1000 W suggested PSU, and PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. The MI300 has no width specification, while the RTX 6000D is explicitly dual-slot. The MI300 has no listed series, codename, or game clock, while the RTX 6000D has a series designation of GeForce 60-series and no game clock either. The MI300's FP16 performance is listed as 1:1 with FP32, and the RTX 6000D's FP16 is also listed as 1:1.