AMD Instinct MI300A vs AMD Radeon 8060S Comparison

AMD Instinct MI300A and AMD Radeon 8060S occupy opposite ends of AMD’s computing spectrum, and the recorded data confirms they share almost nothing beyond the manufacturer’s name. The MI300A is a data center accelerator built on CDNA 3.0, while the 8060S is a mobile graphics processor based on RDNA 3.5. Their benchmark histories, thermal envelopes, and architectural priorities place them in entirely different markets.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300A wins in raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth, with the database showing 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 5.32 TB/s of memory bandwidth. The 8060S manages 14.85 TFLOPS of FP32 and system-dependent memory bandwidth. The MI300A also has a massive transistor count of 153,000 million versus an unknown figure for the 8060S, and its die size of 1017 mm² dwarfs the 8060S’s 308 mm².

The AMD Radeon 8060S wins in every consumer-facing metric recorded. Its benchmark scores include a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 2162, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 84626, and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 80483. It has a percentile rank of 87 against all GPUs, meaning it outperforms nearly nine out of ten recorded devices. The MI300A has no benchmark scores in the database, sitting at the 50th percentile with an average score of zero.

The 8060S also wins on power efficiency. Its TDP is 55 W, whereas the MI300A consumes 750 W. The 8060S is an IGP with portable device dependent display outputs, while the MI300A is an OAM module with no display outputs at all. The 8060S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI300A reports N/A for all graphics APIs.

Architecture Differences

The MI300A uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process, with the chip codenamed Aqua Vanjaram. The 8060S uses RDNA 3.5 on a 4 nm TSMC process, with the chip codenamed Strix Halo. The process node difference is small, but the architectural philosophies diverge sharply.

The MI300A has 14,592 shading units, 912 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs. Its pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s and its texture rate is 1,915.2 GTexel/s. The 8060S has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 40 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate is 185.6 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 464.0 GTexel/s. The MI300A is clearly optimized for compute workloads that do not require rasterization, while the 8060S is a fully featured graphics processor.

Memory configurations could not be more different. The MI300A has 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus, yielding 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The 8060S uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. The clock speeds also differ: the MI300A runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost, while the 8060S runs at a 1295 MHz base and 2900 MHz boost. The 8060S’s higher boost clock reflects its graphics-oriented design.

The MI300A’s memory clock is 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective speed. The 8060S’s memory clock is listed as system shared, meaning it relies entirely on the host system’s RAM. The MI300A’s API support is nonexistent for graphics, while the 8060S supports modern graphics standards.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the MI300A and the 8060S. The MI300A has zero benchmark entries, zero wins, and zero losses. The 8060S has three recorded benchmarks, all of which show strong results for a mobile integrated GPU.

The 8060S’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2162 places it in a competitive position. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB with an average score of 55698, which is 0.1% behind the 8060S’s average of 55757. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 scores 56083, which is 0.6% ahead of the 8060S. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54828, putting it 1.7% behind, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 scores 54247, which is 2.8% behind.

These deltas show the 8060S performing essentially on par with desktop cards like the RX 6750 GRE and RTX 5080, despite being an integrated processor with a 55 W TDP. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 84626 and Vulkan score of 80483 reinforce this pattern, suggesting the 8060S delivers desktop-class compute in a mobile form factor.

The MI300A’s lack of benchmark data means the database cannot quantify its real-world performance relative to the 8060S. However, its architectural specifications indicate it is designed for a different workload entirely. The 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is over four times the 8060S’s 14.85 TFLOPS, and the 5.32 TB/s memory bandwidth is unmatched by any integrated solution.

The Verdict

The data shows two products with no meaningful overlap. The AMD Instinct MI300A is a compute accelerator with 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32, 128 GB of HBM3, and a 750 W TDP. It has no display outputs, no graphics API support, and no benchmark scores in the database. Its 50th percentile ranking against all GPUs reflects the absence of recorded test results, not a measured performance level.

The AMD Radeon 8060S is a mobile integrated GPU with 14.85 TFLOPS of FP32, 40 ray tracing cores, and a 55 W TDP. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and it has recorded benchmark scores that place it at the 87th percentile against all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include desktop discrete cards, with the RTX 4080 trailing by 2.8% and the RX 6750 GRE trailing by 0.1%.

For compute workloads requiring massive memory bandwidth and raw FP32 throughput, the MI300A is the only option with the necessary specifications. For graphics rendering, ray tracing, and portable device integration, the 8060S is the only option with the necessary features. The choice between them is not a matter of one being better than the other; it is a matter of the workload determining the appropriate hardware.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300A has 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32, while the AMD Radeon 8060S has 14.85 TFLOPS.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 8060S support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it has 40 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the MI300A?

A: The MI300A has 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth from 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus.

Q: How does the 8060S compare to the RTX 4080 in average benchmark score?

A: The 8060S has an average benchmark score of 55757, which is 2.8% higher than the RTX 4080’s 54247.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The MI300A has a TDP of 750 W, while the 8060S has a TDP of 55 W.

Q: Does the MI300A have any display outputs?

A: No, the MI300A has no display outputs, while the 8060S has portable device dependent outputs.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every recorded specification field. The MI300A uses a 5 nm process with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, while the 8060S uses a 4 nm process with unknown transistor count on a 308 mm² die. The MI300A has 14,592 shading units, 912 TMUs, and 0 ROPs, while the 8060S has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs.

The MI300A’s base clock is 1000 MHz with a 2100 MHz boost, while the 8060S has a 1295 MHz base and 2900 MHz boost. Memory differs fundamentally: the MI300A has 128 GB of HBM3 with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, while the 8060S uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The MI300A has 0 MPixel/s pixel rate and 1,915.2 GTexel/s texture rate, while the 8060S has 185.6 GPixel/s pixel rate and 464.0 GTexel/s texture rate.

The MI300A has a 750 W TDP and an OAM Module slot width, while the 8060S has a 55 W TDP and an IGP slot width. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16, but the MI300A has no display outputs while the 8060S has portable device dependent outputs. The MI300A reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, while the 8060S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300A’s release date is 2023-12-05, and the 8060S’s release date is 2025-01-05.