AMD Instinct MI300A vs AMD Radeon 880M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no overlapping benchmark results for the AMD Instinct MI300A and the AMD Radeon 880M. The MI300A has no recorded benchmark scores, while the 880M has a full suite of ten results. This absence of direct comparison data means the head-to-head analysis must rely on the recorded specifications and the 880M's performance relative to its nearest rivals.

The Radeon 880M delivers an average benchmark score of 8436 across all recorded tests. Its percentile ranking of 43 places it slightly below the median of all GPUs in the database. The nearest rivals show a tight cluster: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX scores 8427, a delta of 0.1% ahead of the 880M. The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 scores 8458, putting the 880M 0.3% behind. The AMD Radeon HD 8870M scores 8462, also 0.3% ahead of the 880M. The AMD Radeon R9 M375X scores 8325, leaving the 880M 1.3% ahead of that part.

Looking at individual tests, the 880M shows a clear strength in compute workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 31285 stands well above its Vulkan score of 40006, though the Vulkan result is the higher of the two API-based scores. The Passmark G3D score of 7615 represents the primary gaming-oriented metric, while the Passmark G2D score of 969 indicates 2D desktop performance. The DirectX tests show a notable split: DirectX 9 scores 97, DirectX 11 scores 73, but both DirectX 10 and DirectX 12 drop to 31 and 32 respectively. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test records 535. The Passmark GPU Compute score of 3719 confirms that compute tasks are handled substantially better than the older DirectX 10 and 12 paths.

For the MI300A, the absence of benchmark data means its percentile of 50 is a neutral placeholder. The database records no wins for either part in head-to-head comparisons. The MI300A's FP32 throughput of 61.29 TFLOPS versus the 880M's 4.454 TFLOPS suggests a massive gap in raw compute, but without actual benchmark scores, the performance relationship cannot be quantified. The texture rate difference is similarly stark: 1,915.2 GTexel/s for the MI300A against 139.2 GTexel/s for the 880M.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI300A have any benchmark results in the database?

A: No. The MI300A has an empty benchmarks array, a percentile of 50, and an average benchmark score of 0. The Radeon 880M has ten recorded benchmark scores.

Q: How does the Radeon 880M compare to its closest rivals?

A: The 880M sits within 1.3% of four rivals. It is 0.1% behind the GTX 675MX, 0.3% behind the MX330 and HD 8870M, and 1.3% ahead of the R9 M375X. Its average score of 8436 places it at the 43rd percentile of all GPUs.

Q: What is the most significant performance gap between the two chips?

A: The FP32 compute capability differs by roughly a factor of 13.8, with the MI300A delivering 61.29 TFLOPS versus the 880M's 4.454 TFLOPS. The texture rate gap is about 13.8 times as well, at 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus 139.2 GTexel/s.

Q: Which chip has higher boost clocks?

A: The Radeon 880M boosts to 2900 MHz, while the MI300A boosts to 2100 MHz. The 880M also has a lower base clock of 400 MHz compared to the MI300A's 1000 MHz.

Q: What memory configurations do the two chips use?

A: The MI300A uses 128 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The 880M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent.

Q: Are there any API differences between the two?

A: Yes. The 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300A reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Architecture Differences

The two AMD parts represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The MI300A uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on a 5 nm process from TSMC, with the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The 880M uses RDNA 3.5 on a 4 nm process, with the Strix Point chip. The process node difference is small, but the transistor counts are not. The MI300A packs 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 150.4 million per square millimeter. The 880M has 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die, with a density of 145.9 million per square millimeter. The MI300A is roughly 4.5 times larger in die area and holds about 4.5 times more transistors.

The compute pipelines diverge sharply. The MI300A has 14,592 shading units, 912 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs. The pixel rate is recorded as 0 MPixel/s. The 880M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s. The MI300A has no ray tracing cores listed, while the 880M has 12 RT cores. Neither part lists tensor cores.

Memory architecture is a defining difference. The MI300A uses 128 GB of HBM3 across an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The 880M relies on system shared memory, with bus width and bandwidth both listed as system dependent. The MI300A's memory clock is 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective data rate. The 880M's memory clock is not specified beyond being system shared.

Power characteristics separate the two clearly. The MI300A has a TDP of 750 W, uses an OAM Module slot width, and has no power connectors listed. The suggested PSU is 1150 W. The 880M has a TDP of 15 W, fits an IGP slot width, has no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU listed. The MI300A connects via PCIe 5.0 x16, while the 880M uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

The MI300A has no display outputs, while the 880M's outputs are listed as portable device dependent. The MI300A reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan APIs. The 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear split. The MI300A is a compute accelerator with massive FP32 throughput, enormous memory bandwidth, and no display or graphics API support. The 880M is an integrated graphics processor with modest compute, full API support, and display outputs tied to portable devices.

For workloads requiring raw FP32 compute, the MI300A's 61.29 TFLOPS versus the 880M's 4.454 TFLOPS indicates a decisive advantage. The memory bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s on the MI300A versus system dependent bandwidth on the 880M reinforces this. The MI300A also has 14,592 shading units versus 768, and 912 TMUs versus 48. The MI300A's pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s confirms it is not designed for rasterization.

For graphics rendering and general GPU compute in a portable context, the 880M is the only viable option. It has 16 ROPs, 12 RT cores, and a pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s. Its benchmark scores show it performs near the median of all GPUs, with its average score of 8436 at the 43rd percentile. The nearest rivals are all within 1.3%, indicating the 880M sits in a tightly contested performance band.

The power envelope difference is extreme. The MI300A's 750 W TDP and 1150 W suggested PSU place it in a server or workstation context. The 880M's 15 W TDP suits mobile integration. The 880M's boost clock of 2900 MHz is higher than the MI300A's 2100 MHz, but the MI300A has a higher base clock of 1000 MHz versus 400 MHz. The 880M's FP16 throughput equals its FP32 at 4.454 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, a feature the MI300A does not list.

The release dates show the MI300A launched on 2023-12-05, while the 880M arrived on 2024-07-14. The MI300A's predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct, and the 880M's predecessor is Navi II IGP. Both have no successor listed.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Instinct MI300A | AMD Radeon 880M |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | RDNA 3.5 |

| Process node | 5 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | 34,000 million |

| Die size | 1017 mm² | 233 mm² |

| Transistor density | 150.4M / mm² | 145.9M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1000 MHz | 400 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2100 MHz | 2900 MHz |

| Memory size | 128 GB | System Shared |

| Memory type | HBM3 | System Shared |

| Memory bus width | 8192 bit | System Shared |

| Memory bandwidth | 5.32 TB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading units | 14592 | 768 |

| TMUs | 912 | 48 |

| ROPs | 0 | 16 |

| RT cores | Not listed | 12 |

| Pixel rate | 0 MPixel/s | 46.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 1,915.2 GTexel/s | 139.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 61.29 TFLOPS | 4.454 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 4.454 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 15 W |

| Slot width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Suggested PSU | 1150 W | Not listed |

| Bus interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Release date | 2023-12-05 | 2024-07-14 |

| Production status | Not listed | Active |

Where Each One Wins

The MI300A wins decisively in compute throughput. Its FP32 performance of 61.29 TFLOPS is about 13.8 times the 880M's 4.454 TFLOPS. The texture rate of 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus 139.2 GTexel/s shows a similar margin. The memory subsystem is not comparable: 128 GB of HBM3 at 5.32 TB/s versus system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The MI300A's 14,592 shading units dwarf the 880M's 768. The 750 W TDP and OAM Module form factor indicate this is built for sustained compute workloads in server environments.

The 880M wins in graphics features and portability. It has 16 ROPs versus zero on the MI300A, and a pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s versus 0 MPixel/s. The 12 RT cores provide ray tracing capability that the MI300A does not list. The 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI300A reports N/A for all three. The 15 W TDP versus 750 W means the 880M fits into mobile devices, and its display outputs are portable device dependent. The higher boost clock of 2900 MHz versus 2100 MHz helps the 880M in short-duration graphics tasks.

The benchmark data only exists for the 880M. Its average score of 8436 at the 43rd percentile places it near the middle of the database. The nearest rival comparisons show a spread of only 1.3%, meaning the 880M performs in a very tight band around its peers. The Passmark G3D score of 7615 indicates the strongest result among its recorded tests, while the Passmark DirectX 10 score of 31 is the weakest. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 40006 exceeds the OpenCL score of 31285, suggesting Vulkan is the more efficient API on this part.

The MI300A has no benchmark scores, so its percentile of 50 is an unverified placeholder. The database records no wins for either part in head-to-head comparisons. The data indicates the MI300A is a specialized accelerator for compute workloads, while the 880M is a general-purpose integrated GPU for graphics and compute in portable systems.