AMD Instinct MI300A vs AMD Radeon RX 7700S Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Instinct MI300A and the AMD Radeon RX 7700S. The MI300A has an empty benchmark array, a zero average benchmark score, and a percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs. The RX 7700S, by contrast, holds three recorded benchmark scores and an average score of 33,849, placing it at the 78th percentile.

For the RX 7700S, the recorded measurements show a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,185. Its Geekbench OpenCL result reaches 62,983, while the Vulkan score sits at 36,380. These figures place the RX 7700S slightly below the AMD Radeon HD 7950, which averages 33,951, a delta of -0.3%. It also trails the AMD Radeon RX 480 by 0.4%, as that card averages 33,997. The RX 7700S edges ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB, which averages 33,694, a delta of +0.5%. The NVIDIA RTX A5000, averaging 33,622, sits 0.7% behind the RX 7700S.

The MI300A cannot be compared on these same tests because it has no recorded scores. The data shows the MI300A is a compute accelerator with no display outputs and no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API support, which explains the absence of graphics-oriented benchmarks. The RX 7700S is a mobile graphics processor with full API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, and it carries a production status of Active.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The MI300A delivers 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, roughly three times the 20.48 TFLOPS of the RX 7700S.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The MI300A uses 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus, providing 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7700S uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the difference in transistor count and die size?

A: The MI300A packs 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, while the RX 7700S has 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. Both use TSMC as the foundry.

Q: Are both GPUs from the same architectural family?

A: No. The MI300A uses CDNA 3.0 architecture on a 5 nm node, while the RX 7700S uses RDNA 3.0 architecture on a 6 nm node.

Q: What are the published benchmark scores for the MI300A?

A: The database shows no benchmark scores for the MI300A, an average benchmark score of 0, and a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 7700S boosts to 2500 MHz, while the MI300A boosts to 2100 MHz. The RX 7700S also has a higher base clock at 1500 MHz versus 1000 MHz for the MI300A.

Where Each One Wins

The MI300A dominates in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 figure of 61.29 TFLOPS is triple the 20.48 TFLOPS of the RX 7700S. The texture rate follows the same pattern: 1,915.2 GTexel/s for the MI300A versus 320.0 GTexel/s for the RX 7700S. Memory bandwidth is another decisive win, with 5.32 TB/s against 288.0 GB/s. The MI300A also holds a 16x advantage in memory capacity (128 GB versus 8 GB) and a 64x wider memory bus (8192-bit versus 128-bit). The shading unit count favors the MI300A at 14,592 versus 2,048, and TMU count favors it at 912 versus 128.

The RX 7700S wins in several practical areas. Its pixel rate is 160.0 GPixel/s, while the MI300A records 0 MPixel/s, meaning the MI300A cannot output pixels at all. The RX 7700S has 64 ROPs, whereas the MI300A has 0. The RX 7700S also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI300A lists N/A for all three APIs. The RX 7700S has 32 ray tracing cores, a feature completely absent from the MI300A. Clock speeds favor the RX 7700S as well, with a 2500 MHz boost and 1500 MHz base versus 2100 MHz and 1000 MHz for the MI300A.

The RX 7700S is also the only one with recorded benchmark results. Its average score of 33,849 and 78th percentile ranking indicate it performs competitively against older desktop cards like the HD 7950 and RX 480. The MI300A has a 50th percentile ranking by default due to the absence of any measured data.

Specification Differences

The two accelerators differ across nearly every measurable field. The MI300A uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip, while the RX 7700S uses Navi 33. The process node differs: 5 nm for the MI300A versus 6 nm for the RX 7700S. Transistor counts are 153,000 million and 13,300 million respectively. Die sizes are 1017 mm² and 204 mm². Transistor density is 150.4M per mm² for the MI300A and 65.2M per mm² for the RX 7700S.

Memory specifications diverge completely. The MI300A has 128 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7700S has 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks are 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) for the MI300A and 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the RX 7700S.

Compute units differ in count and capability. The MI300A has 14,592 shading units, 912 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. The RX 7700S has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The RX 7700S includes 32 ray tracing cores; the MI300A lists none. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for the MI300A and 160.0 GPixel/s for the RX 7700S. Texture rates are 1,915.2 GTexel/s and 320.0 GTexel/s.

Power and physical specifications also differ. The MI300A has a TDP of 750 W and uses an OAM Module slot width. The RX 7700S has a TDP of 100 W and uses an IGP slot width. Neither uses external power connectors. The suggested PSU is 1150 W for the MI300A; no suggestion is listed for the RX 7700S. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 for the MI300A and PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RX 7700S. Display outputs are "No outputs" for the MI300A and "Portable Device Dependent" for the RX 7700S.

API support differs sharply. The MI300A has N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The RX 7700S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7700S also lists FP16 performance at 40.96 TFLOPS (2:1), while the MI300A has no FP16 figure recorded.

Release dates differ by roughly eleven months. The RX 7700S launched on January 3, 2023, and the MI300A launched on December 5, 2023. The RX 7700S lists a predecessor of Polaris Mobile and a production status of Active. The MI300A lists a predecessor of Radeon Instinct, with no production status recorded. Neither product has a successor listed.

Architecture Differences

The MI300A uses CDNA 3.0, AMD's compute-optimized architecture designed for data center workloads. The RX 7700S uses RDNA 3.0, a graphics-optimized architecture for mobile gaming laptops. This architectural split explains the divergent feature sets.

CDNA 3.0 on the MI300A prioritizes raw FP32 throughput and memory bandwidth. The 5 nm process node allows 153,000 million transistors in a 1017 mm² package. The 8192-bit memory bus feeding 128 GB of HBM3 delivers 5.32 TB/s, a figure that dwarfs the 288.0 GB/s of the RX 7700S. The MI300A has no ROPs and no ray tracing cores, confirming its role as a compute accelerator rather than a graphics renderer. It also lacks any display outputs and any graphics API support, meaning all rendering work must happen elsewhere.

RDNA 3.0 on the RX 7700S takes the opposite approach. The 6 nm node produces a 204 mm² die with 13,300 million transistors. The architecture includes 64 ROPs, 32 ray tracing cores, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate support. The pixel rate of 160.0 GPixel/s and FP16 throughput of 40.96 TFLOPS (2:1) indicate a processor built for real-time graphics and gaming workloads. The 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus are modest by comparison but appropriate for a mobile part with a 100 W TDP.

The transistor density tells a similar story. The MI300A achieves 150.4M transistors per mm², reflecting the denser 5 nm process and the large HBM3 memory controllers. The RX 7700S reaches 65.2M per mm² on 6 nm. Both use TSMC as the foundry, but the process generation difference shows in the density figures.

The cache hierarchy is not recorded for either part, but the other architectural choices are clear. The MI300A allocates die area to compute units, memory controllers, and HBM3 stacks. The RX 7700S allocates area to ROPs, ray tracing hardware, and graphics pipelines. The MI300A has no FP16 figure listed, while the RX 7700S explicitly lists FP16 at twice the FP32 rate, a common pattern for graphics workloads that mix precision types.

The generation labels differ as well. The MI300A belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation, and the RX 7700S belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation. The codenames reflect different product lines: Aqua Vanjaram for the MI300A and Hotpink Bonefish for the RX 7700S. The RX 7700S is part of the Radeon RX 7000 series, while the MI300A has no series designation. The MI300A succeeds Radeon Instinct, and the RX 7700S succeeds Polaris Mobile. Both are AMD products, but they target entirely different segments of the market.