AMD Instinct MI300A vs Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct benchmark scores for either the AMD Instinct MI300A or the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0, and the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. Consequently, there are no numeric wins to attribute to either side in direct comparison. The percentile ranking against all GPUs is identical for both parts at 50, which indicates that the database has not yet accumulated enough performance data to differentiate them statistically. What can be compared directly are the theoretical throughput limits derived from their clock speeds and execution resources, which reveal a chasm in raw compute capability.

The FP32 throughput figures are the clearest numerical separator. The AMD Instinct MI300A delivers 61.29 TFLOPS of single-precision compute, while the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile produces 307.2 GFLOPS. Converting both to the same unit, the AMD part operates at 61,290 GFLOPS, which is approximately 199.5 times higher than the Intel part. This ratio is not a benchmark result but a direct calculation from the recorded FP32 specifications. Similarly, texture rate shows a massive gap: the MI300A reaches 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus 9.6 GTexel/s for the UHD 710, a factor of roughly 199.5 as well, consistent with the FP32 ratio given the respective TMU counts. Pixel rate is the only metric where the Intel part is not zero: the UHD 710 records 4.800 GPixel/s, while the MI300A records 0 MPixel/s, because the latter has no ROPs and no display outputs. This makes the pixel rate comparison an outlier, favoring the integrated graphics part solely due to the accelerator's lack of raster output units.

Clock behavior also differs substantially. The MI300A has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz, while the UHD 710 has a base of 300 MHz and a boost of 1200 MHz. The AMD part's boost clock is 75% higher than the Intel part's boost clock, and its base clock is more than three times higher. These clock rates, combined with the execution unit counts, drive the throughput figures described above. The memory subsystem reinforces the separation: the MI300A uses 128 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth, whereas the UHD 710 uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth. No numeric bandwidth is recorded for the Intel part, so the comparison stops at the fact that the AMD accelerator has dedicated high-bandwidth memory while the Intel part relies on the host system's memory.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages and are built for entirely different roles. The AMD Instinct MI300A uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture, specifically designed for compute acceleration, while the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile uses Generation 12.2, an integrated graphics architecture based on the Raptor Lake chip. The AMD part is manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC, whereas the Intel part uses a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The transistor count for the AMD accelerator is recorded as 153,000 million (153 billion) on a die size of 1017 mm², which yields a transistor density of 150.4 million transistors per square millimeter. No transistor count, die size, or density is recorded for the Intel integrated graphics part.

The execution resource scales reflect their different purposes. The MI300A has 14,592 shading units, 912 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs. The UHD 710 has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The AMD part has no raster output units because it is not designed for display output; its display outputs field reads "No outputs." The Intel part, by contrast, has 4 ROPs and its display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it is intended to drive displays on mobile systems. The MI300A uses an OAM Module slot width, while the UHD 710 is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) that uses a Ring Bus interface. The AMD part connects via PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Intel part uses the Ring Bus, which is typical for integrated graphics sharing the processor's internal interconnect.

Memory architecture is another fundamental difference. The MI300A has 128 GB of HBM3 memory with an 8192-bit bus width and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is recorded as 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective data rate. The UHD 710 has "System Shared" memory in terms of size, type, bus width, and bandwidth; the bandwidth is explicitly recorded as "System Dependent." This means the Intel part has no dedicated memory of its own and must share the system's main memory, with performance varying based on the host platform. The MI300A has no power connectors listed, but its TDP is 750 W with a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The UHD 710 has a TDP of 15 W and no suggested PSU, consistent with an integrated part that draws power from the parent processor.

API support differs as well. The MI300A lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all as "N/A," confirming it is not a graphics-oriented device. The UHD 710 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The release dates also differ: the AMD part was released on December 5, 2023, while the Intel part was released on January 3, 2023. The Intel part has a successor listed as "Arc Graphics-M," while the AMD part has a predecessor listed as "Radeon Instinct" and no successor.

Where Each One Wins

Without recorded benchmark scores, the wins must be derived from the specification data. The AMD Instinct MI300A wins decisively in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 output of 61.29 TFLOPS is the headline figure, and its texture rate of 1,915.2 GTexel/s indicates it can process textured data at an enormous rate. The 128 GB of HBM3 memory with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth makes it suitable for workloads that require large datasets resident on the accelerator, such as dense linear algebra or large-scale simulation. The 5 nm process node and 153 billion transistors point to a device built for maximum compute density. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface allows high-speed host communication, and the absence of display outputs confirms it is a compute-only device.

The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile wins in areas related to system integration and basic graphics. Its 4 ROPs and 4.800 GPixel/s pixel rate mean it can rasterize simple scenes, which the MI300A cannot do at all. The UHD 710 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it usable for general-purpose graphics and display output. Its 15 W TDP is minuscule compared to the MI300A's 750 W, so it can operate in power-constrained mobile systems without additional cooling or power delivery. The Ring Bus interface means it is directly integrated into the host processor, requiring no separate board or slot. Its production status is listed as "Active," while the MI300A's production status is not recorded. The UHD 710 also has a successor, Arc Graphics-M, implying an active product line, whereas the MI300A has no successor listed.

The memory situation splits them further. The MI300A's dedicated HBM3 with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth is far superior for data-intensive compute, but the UHD 710's system shared memory approach is simpler and requires no dedicated memory allocation. The system dependent bandwidth of the Intel part means its performance scales with the host memory, which is a limitation for compute but acceptable for integrated graphics.

The Verdict

The data describes two devices with no overlap in purpose. The AMD Instinct MI300A is a compute accelerator with no display outputs, no graphics API support, and a TDP of 750 W. It delivers 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 1,915.2 GTexel/s of texture rate, and 5.32 TB/s of memory bandwidth across 128 GB of HBM3. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile is an integrated graphics processor with 15 W TDP, 4 ROPs, 4.800 GPixel/s pixel rate, support for DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and system shared memory. The MI300A is appropriate for workloads that demand massive parallel compute and large memory capacity, such as simulation, scientific computing, and machine learning training. The UHD 710 is appropriate for basic display output and light graphics tasks in a portable system.

The percentile ranking of 50 for both parts in the database is not informative, as both have an average benchmark score of 0. The only meaningful numeric comparisons come from the specification sheet. The FP32 ratio of approximately 199.5 to 1 in favor of the MI300A, the texture rate ratio of approximately 199.5 to 1, and the pixel rate of 4.800 GPixel/s for the UHD 710 versus 0 for the MI300A summarize the trade-off. A system builder choosing between these two is not making a performance comparison; they are choosing between a dedicated accelerator and an integrated graphics unit. The MI300A requires an OAM Module slot, an 1150 W suggested PSU, and PCIe 5.0 x16 connectivity. The UHD 710 requires only a host processor with a Ring Bus and 15 W of power budget. The choice is dictated by the workload and platform, not by any head-to-head benchmark data, which does not exist in the database.

FAQ

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference between the AMD Instinct MI300A and the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile?

A: The MI300A delivers 61.29 TFLOPS, while the UHD 710 delivers 307.2 GFLOPS. The MI300A's FP32 output is approximately 199.5 times higher.

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI300A support display output?

A: No. The MI300A lists "No outputs" for display outputs, and its DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support are all recorded as "N/A." It has 0 ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s.

Q: What memory configuration does each part use?

A: The MI300A uses 128 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The UHD 710 uses "System Shared" memory with "System Dependent" bandwidth.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two parts?

A: The MI300A has a TDP of 750 W with a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The UHD 710 has a TDP of 15 W and no suggested PSU.

Q: Which part has a higher pixel rate?

A: The UHD 710 has a pixel rate of 4.800 GPixel/s. The MI300A has a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s because it has no ROPs.

Q: What are the release dates for these two products?

A: The MI300A was released on December 5, 2023. The UHD 710 was released on January 3, 2023.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI300A | Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Generation 12.2 |

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | Raptor Lake |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | Not recorded |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 1200 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 | 14,592 | 128 |

| TMUs | 912 | 8 |

| ROPs | 0 | 4 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 4.800 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,915.2 GTexel/s | 9.600 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 61.29 TFLOPS | 307.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not recorded | 614.4 GFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 15 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Suggested PSU | 1150 W | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2023-01-03 |

| Production Status | Not recorded | Active |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | Not recorded |

| Successor | Not recorded | Arc Graphics-M |