AMD Instinct MI300A vs NVIDIA Jetson T4000 Comparison

The Verdict

The database comparison between the AMD Instinct MI300A and the NVIDIA Jetson T4000 presents two entirely different compute platforms, each engineered for distinct workloads. The recorded data shows the AMD Instinct MI300A is a high-power, data-center-class accelerator with massive throughput capabilities, while the NVIDIA Jetson T4000 is a compact, low-power embedded module. Neither product directly competes with the other in typical deployment scenarios, and the data confirms that selection should be based on the physical and thermal constraints of the target system.

The AMD Instinct MI300A delivers 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, a 750 W TDP, and 128 GB of HBM3 memory with 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. This positions it as a server-grade compute node for dense numerical workloads. The NVIDIA Jetson T4000, by contrast, offers 4.700 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, a 90 W TDP, and 64 GB of LPDDR5X memory with 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Jetson T4000 fits into a 15 mm thick IGP form factor, whereas the MI300A uses an OAM Module slot width with no display outputs. The data indicates that anyone constrained by power budgets below 250 W should choose the Jetson T4000, while systems with 1150 W power supply recommendations should consider the MI300A.

Both parts share a 50th percentile ranking against all GPUs, and both have an average benchmark score of zero in the current database, meaning no direct benchmark results are available for either unit. This makes the architectural and specification differences the primary basis for comparison. The MI300A is the clear choice for maximum compute density and memory bandwidth, while the Jetson T4000 is the only option here for compact, low-power deployments.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300A wins decisively in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 rating of 61.29 TFLOPS is approximately 13 times higher than the Jetson T4000's 4.700 TFLOPS. Texture rate follows the same pattern: the MI300A reaches 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus 73.44 GTexel/s on the Jetson T4000. Memory bandwidth is another dominant category, with the MI300A delivering 5.32 TB/s compared to 273.2 GB/s on the Jetson T4000. The MI300A also carries a wider 8192-bit memory bus versus 256-bit, and more than double the memory capacity at 128 GB versus 64 GB. The shading unit count reinforces the separation: 14,592 units on the MI300A versus 1,536 on the Jetson T4000.

The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 wins in power efficiency and physical footprint. Its 90 W TDP is dramatically lower than the MI300A's 750 W, and its suggested PSU of 250 W is far below the MI300A's 1150 W. The Jetson T4000 also provides features the MI300A lacks entirely: 12 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores. The MI300A has no RT cores and no tensor cores listed in the database. The Jetson T4000 has a pixel rate of 24.48 GPixel/s, while the MI300A is recorded at 0 MPixel/s. The Jetson T4000 measures 87 mm by 100 mm by 15 mm, making it suitable for embedded and edge systems, while the MI300A has no recorded dimensions and uses an OAM Module slot.

The release timeline also differs. The MI300A was released on 2023-12-05, while the Jetson T4000 has a release date of 2026-01-04. The Jetson T4000 is marked as Active production status, with a predecessor of Server Hopper and a successor of Server Rubin. The MI300A lists Radeon Instinct as its predecessor, with no successor recorded.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators come from different architecture families. The AMD Instinct MI300A uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, while the NVIDIA Jetson T4000 uses the Blackwell architecture on the GB10B chip. Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the similarities end there. The MI300A integrates 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The Jetson T4000 has an unknown transistor count and a 391 mm² die size with no density figure recorded.

The MI300A's compute configuration includes 14,592 shading units and 912 texture mapping units, with no ROPs recorded. The Jetson T4000 has 1,536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Jetson T4000 also adds 12 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, neither of which appear in the MI300A's data. The MI300A's clock behavior differs as well: a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz, versus the Jetson T4000's fixed 1530 MHz base and boost. Memory clocks are 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) on the MI300A and 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) on the Jetson T4000.

Memory architecture separates the two further. The MI300A uses HBM3 with 128 GB capacity, while the Jetson T4000 uses LPDDR5X with 64 GB. The bus widths are 8192-bit and 256-bit respectively. Neither part provides display outputs, and both have N/A API support for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, confirming their compute-only roles.

The power delivery requirements highlight the scale difference. The MI300A draws a 750 W TDP and requires a suggested PSU of 1150 W, while the Jetson T4000 draws 90 W and needs a 250 W PSU. Neither uses external power connectors per the database. The bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 5.0 x16 for the MI300A and PCIe 5.0 x8 for the Jetson T4000.

FAQ

Q: Which product has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300A delivers 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32, compared to 4.700 TFLOPS on the NVIDIA Jetson T4000.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Jetson T4000 support ray tracing or tensor operations?

A: Yes. The Jetson T4000 includes 12 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores. The AMD Instinct MI300A has no RT cores or tensor cores listed in the database.

Q: What is the memory capacity and type for each product?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300A uses 128 GB of HBM3 memory with a 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 uses 64 GB of LPDDR5X memory with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each device?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300A has a 750 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 has a 90 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the NVIDIA Jetson T4000?

A: The launch MSRP is 1,999 USD. The AMD Instinct MI300A has no launch MSRP recorded.

Q: Are there any display outputs on either product?

A: No. Both the AMD Instinct MI300A and the NVIDIA Jetson T4000 have no display outputs listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for this pair, and both products have an average benchmark score of zero. However, the specification-level comparison provides clear quantitative gaps. The most significant difference appears in FP32 throughput: 61.29 TFLOPS on the MI300A versus 4.700 TFLOPS on the Jetson T4000. This is a 13-fold advantage for the AMD part in raw floating-point work. Texture rate shows a similar ratio: 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus 73.44 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth is the largest proportional gap, with 5.32 TB/s on the MI300A against 273.2 GB/s on the Jetson T4000, a difference of roughly 19.5 times.

The Jetson T4000 counters with capabilities the MI300A cannot match. Its pixel rate of 24.48 GPixel/s exceeds the MI300A's recorded 0 MPixel/s. The inclusion of 12 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores gives the Jetson T4000 specialized acceleration paths absent from the MI300A's data sheet. The Jetson T4000 also operates at a fixed 1530 MHz clock, while the MI300A ranges from 1000 MHz base to 2100 MHz boost. This fixed clock behavior may simplify power management in constrained environments.

Physical and power specifications also favor the Jetson T4000 in embedded scenarios. The Jetson T4000's 90 W TDP is 660 W lower than the MI300A's 750 W. The suggested PSU figures reinforce this: 250 W versus 1150 W. The Jetson T4000's dimensions of 87 mm by 100 mm by 15 mm allow installation in compact chassis, while the MI300A uses an OAM Module slot width with no recorded dimensions. The Jetson T4000 is also listed as Active production status, while the MI300A has no production status recorded.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two products:

• Chip: Aqua Vanjaram (AMD) versus GB10B (NVIDIA)
• Architecture: CDNA 3.0 versus Blackwell
• Generation: Instinct (MIx) versus Server Blackwell (Bxx)
• Transistors: 153,000 million versus unknown
• Die Size: 1017 mm² versus 391 mm²
• Transistor Density: 150.4M / mm² versus not recorded
• Base Clock: 1000 MHz versus 1530 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2100 MHz versus 1530 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1300 MHz 5.2 Gbps effective versus 1067 MHz 8.5 Gbps effective
• Memory Size: 128 GB versus 64 GB
• Memory Type: HBM3 versus LPDDR5X
• Memory Bus Width: 8192 bit versus 256 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 5.32 TB/s versus 273.2 GB/s
• Shading Units: 14,592 versus 1,536
• TMUs: 912 versus 48
• ROPs: 0 versus 16
• RT Cores: not listed versus 12
• Tensor Cores: not listed versus 64
• Pixel Rate: 0 MPixel/s versus 24.48 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus 73.44 GTexel/s
• FP32: 61.29 TFLOPS versus 4.700 TFLOPS
• FP16: not recorded versus 4.700 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 750 W versus 90 W
• Slot Width: OAM Module versus IGP
• Suggested PSU: 1150 W versus 250 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 5.0 x8
• Dimensions: not recorded versus 87 mm 3.4 inches by 100 mm 3.9 inches by 15 mm 0.6 inches
• Production Status: not recorded versus Active
• Release Date: 2023-12-05 versus 2026-01-04
• Predecessor: Radeon Instinct versus Server Hopper
• Successor: not recorded versus Server Rubin
• Launch MSRP: not recorded versus 1,999 USD