AMD Instinct MI300A vs AMD Radeon RX 7600S Comparison

The AMD Instinct MI300A is a data center accelerator with no direct benchmark scores recorded in the database, while the AMD Radeon RX 7600S is a mobile GPU with a full set of recorded measurements. This comparison relies on architectural specifications and the RX 7600S’s benchmark data, as the MI300A has no test results to compare directly.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 7600S wins every recorded benchmark comparison, simply because it is the only one of the two with benchmark scores in the database. The RX 7600S posts a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1888, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 68012, and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 73868. In Passmark tests, it scores 74 in DirectX 10, 140 in DirectX 11, 65 in DirectX 12, 211 in DirectX 9, 776 in G2D, 15408 in G3D, and 6520 in GPU Compute.

The AMD Instinct MI300A has no benchmark scores recorded, so its wins cannot be quantified in any test. However, its hardware specifications indicate a different purpose. The MI300A is built for compute-heavy workloads with a massive memory pool and extreme bandwidth, while the RX 7600S is designed for rendering and graphics tasks in portable devices. The data shows the RX 7600S is the only part with measurable performance, while the MI300A’s role is defined by its architecture rather than any recorded result.

The percentile data reinforces this split. The RX 7600S sits at the 60th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16696. The MI300A sits at the 50th percentile, but its average benchmark score is 0, reflecting the absence of data. The nearest rivals for the RX 7600S include the NVIDIA T400 4 GB with an average score of 16792 (0.6% higher), the NVIDIA T400 with 16508 (1.1% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 with 16504 (1.2% lower), and the NVIDIA Tesla M4 with 16932 (1.4% higher). These deltas show the RX 7600S sits in a tight competitive band, slightly behind the T400 4 GB and Tesla M4, slightly ahead of the T400 and RTX 5090 D V2.

Architecture Differences

The two AMD parts use completely different architectures. The Instinct MI300A uses CDNA 3.0, AMD’s compute-optimized design, while the RX 7600S uses RDNA 3.0, the graphics-focused architecture. The MI300A’s chip is named Aqua Vanjaram, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The RX 7600S uses the Navi 33 chip, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, built on a 6 nm process also at TSMC. The process node difference is significant: 5 nm allows the MI300A to pack far more transistors into a given area.

Transistor counts diverge sharply. The MI300A has 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The RX 7600S has 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, with a density of 65.2 million per mm². The MI300A’s die is roughly five times larger in area and holds more than eleven times the transistors. This reflects the different design goals: the MI300A is a multi-die compute monster, while the RX 7600S is a compact mobile chip.

Memory architecture is another fundamental split. The MI300A uses 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7600S uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The MI300A has 128 times the memory capacity and roughly 20.8 times the bandwidth, a gap that makes the two incomparable for memory-bound tasks. The MI300A has no display outputs, while the RX 7600S outputs are portable device dependent. The MI300A is an OAM Module with no power connectors, while the RX 7600S is an integrated GPU (IGP) also with no power connectors.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Since the MI300A has no recorded benchmark scores, there are no direct head-to-head results to compare. The database lists zero wins for the MI300A and zero wins for the RX 7600S in head-to-head tests. This is a case where the absence of data defines the comparison, not any measured performance.

The RX 7600S’s benchmark scores stand alone. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1888 shows modern DirectX 12 rendering capability. Geekbench scores of 68012 in OpenCL and 73868 in Vulkan indicate strong compute and graphics API performance. The Passmark suite shows a split between older and newer APIs: DirectX 9 scores 211, DirectX 10 scores 74, DirectX 11 scores 140, and DirectX 12 scores 65. The G2D score of 776 and G3D score of 15408 show that 2D tasks outperform 3D tasks in raw numbers, while GPU Compute scores 6520.

The MI300A’s theoretical specifications suggest it would vastly outperform the RX 7600S in compute-heavy tasks, but no measurements exist to confirm this. The MI300A’s FP32 throughput is 61.29 TFLOPS, while the RX 7600S delivers 15.77 TFLOPS, a factor of roughly 3.9. The MI300A’s texture rate is 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus the RX 7600S’s 246.4 GTexel/s, a factor of about 7.8. The MI300A’s pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s because it has no ROPs, while the RX 7600S delivers 140.8 GPixel/s with 64 ROPs. These numbers tell the story: the MI300A is built for compute and texture throughput, the RX 7600S for pixel rendering.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ across nearly every specification field. Process node: the MI300A uses 5 nm, the RX 7600S uses 6 nm. Transistors: 153,000 million versus 13,300 million. Die size: 1017 mm² versus 204 mm². Transistor density: 150.4M per mm² versus 65.2M per mm².

Base clocks differ: the MI300A runs at 1000 MHz base, the RX 7600S at 1500 MHz. Boost clocks are closer: 2100 MHz for the MI300A, 2200 MHz for the RX 7600S. The RX 7600S has a game clock of 1865 MHz, a field the MI300A does not list. Memory clock: the MI300A runs at 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective, while the RX 7600S runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

Memory size: 128 GB for the MI300A, 8 GB for the RX 7600S. Memory type: HBM3 versus GDDR6. Bus width: 8192 bit versus 128 bit. Bandwidth: 5.32 TB/s versus 256.0 GB/s. Shading units: 14592 for the MI300A, 1792 for the RX 7600S. TMUs: 912 versus 112. ROPs: 0 for the MI300A, 64 for the RX 7600S. The RX 7600S has 28 ray tracing cores, a field the MI300A leaves null.

Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s for the MI300A, 140.8 GPixel/s for the RX 7600S. Texture rate: 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus 246.4 GTexel/s. FP32: 61.29 TFLOPS versus 15.77 TFLOPS. The RX 7600S lists FP16 at 31.54 TFLOPS (2:1), while the MI300A leaves FP16 null. TDP: 750 W for the MI300A, 75 W for the RX 7600S, a tenfold difference. Slot width: OAM Module versus IGP. Suggested PSU: 1150 W for the MI300A, not specified for the RX 7600S.

Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 for the MI300A, PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RX 7600S. Display outputs: none for the MI300A, portable device dependent for the RX 7600S. API support: the MI300A lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, while the RX 7600S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Release dates: the MI300A launched on 2023-12-05, the RX 7600S on 2023-01-03. Predecessors: Radeon Instinct for the MI300A, Polaris Mobile for the RX 7600S.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300A has 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth from its HBM3 memory, while the AMD Radeon RX 7600S has 256.0 GB/s from GDDR6. The MI300A’s bandwidth is roughly 20.8 times higher.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The MI300A is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the RX 7600S is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The MI300A also achieves a higher transistor density of 150.4 million per mm² versus 65.2 million per mm² for the RX 7600S.

Q: Does the RX 7600S support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RX 7600S has 28 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The MI300A does not list ray tracing cores and has no DirectX support, with its API fields marked N/A.

Q: Which part has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The MI300A delivers 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the RX 7600S delivers 15.77 TFLOPS. The MI300A’s FP32 output is approximately 3.9 times higher.

Q: What is the TDP rating for each?

A: The MI300A has a TDP of 750 W with a suggested PSU of 1150 W, while the RX 7600S has a TDP of 75 W with no suggested PSU listed. The MI300A draws ten times the power of the RX 7600S.

Q: Which GPU has display outputs?

A: The RX 7600S has display outputs that are portable device dependent, meaning they vary by the laptop or device it is integrated into. The MI300A has no display outputs at all, as it is an OAM Module designed for compute workloads.