AMD Instinct MI300X vs AMD Radeon 8050S Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark between these two AMD accelerators is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The AMD Instinct MI300X records a score of 317,994, while the AMD Radeon 8050S posts 65,818. That places the Instinct MI300X 383.1% ahead, a margin that reflects the fundamentally different purpose of each chip. In the database's head-to-head comparison, the MI300X takes 1 win and the Radeon 8050S takes 0.

For context, the MI300X sits at the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA B200 at 345,482 (8% ahead), the NVIDIA H200 NVL at 334,891 (5% ahead), the NVIDIA L40S at 295,763 (7.5% behind), and the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation at 287,237 (10.7% behind). The MI300X therefore trails only the top-tier NVIDIA data center parts in raw OpenCL throughput, and it beats the L40S and RTX 6000 Ada Generation by meaningful single-digit percentages.

The Radeon 8050S, by contrast, ranks at the 89th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score across OpenCL and Vulkan is 62,108. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M at 61,896 (0.3% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 at 63,693 (2.5% ahead), the AMD Radeon RX 7600M at 63,775 (2.6% ahead), and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63,830 (2.7% ahead). The 8050S is effectively at parity with these mid-range mobile and low-profile desktop parts, within a 3% band in either direction.

The Geekbench OpenCL delta of 383.1% is the largest such margin in the head-to-head data. The MI300X also holds a second benchmark, Geekbench Vulkan, but the Radeon 8050S is the only one of the two with a recorded Vulkan score (58,398); the MI300X lists no Vulkan result. Across the database's full set of measurements, the MI300X delivers 5.11 times the OpenCL score of the 8050S (317,994 divided by 65,818, a ratio consistent with the 383.1% delta). This is not a close contest by any metric.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300X wins in every category where both chips have data. Its single Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994 dwarfs the Radeon 8050S's 65,818. The MI300X also claims the 100th percentile ranking, meaning it outperforms every other GPU in the database on that test. The Radeon 8050S, at the 89th percentile, is firmly in the upper tier of consumer and mobile GPUs but nowhere near the top.

The Radeon 8050S does have one advantage in the recorded data: it supports a broader software ecosystem. The 8050S lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. The MI300X lists no graphics APIs at all (DirectX N/A, OpenGL N/A, Vulkan N/A), consistent with its role as a compute accelerator with no display outputs. The MI300X's pixel rate is recorded as 0 MPixel/s, while the 8050S delivers 179.2 GPixel/s. For rendering workloads that require rasterization output, the 8050S is the functional part; for pure compute throughput, the MI300X is overwhelmingly faster.

In terms of form factor and deployment, the MI300X is an OAM Module with a 750 W TDP and no power connectors (power is supplied through the module socket). The 8050S is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a 55 W TDP, also with no power connectors. The 8050S's display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it drives screens only in systems where the host provides the connectors. The MI300X has no display outputs at all. The use-case split is therefore clear: the MI300X targets server racks and compute nodes, while the 8050S targets mobile and portable systems where graphics output and low power are requirements.

Architecture Differences

The two chips share a manufacturer but diverge at every architectural level. The Instinct MI300X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, built on a 5 nm TSMC process. The Radeon 8050S uses RDNA 3.5 on the Strix Halo chip, built on a 4 nm TSMC process. The process node difference is one generation apart, with the 8050S using the slightly newer node, but the transistor budgets are not comparable: the MI300X packs 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, giving a density of 150.4M transistors per mm². The 8050S's transistor count is listed as unknown, but its die size is 308 mm², roughly 30% of the MI300X's area.

The compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The MI300X has 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and 0 ROPs. The 8050S has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The MI300X has no raster output stage because it is not designed for display or traditional graphics rendering; its pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s. The 8050S, with its 64 ROPs, delivers 179.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 358.4 GTexel/s. The MI300X's texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s, which is 7.1 times higher than the 8050S's.

Ray tracing support is another divergence. The 8050S includes 32 ray tracing cores, a feature absent from the MI300X's listed specifications (rtCores is null). Neither chip lists tensor cores in the database. The FP32 and FP16 compute rates are identical within each chip (1:1 ratio), but the absolute numbers are far apart: the MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, while the 8050S delivers 11.47 TFLOPS for both. The MI300X's FP32 throughput is 7.1 times higher, matching the texture rate ratio.

Memory architecture is the most fundamental split. The MI300X uses 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) and bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s. The 8050S uses system shared memory, with type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent." The 8050S has no dedicated VRAM; it borrows from the host's system memory pool, and its memory performance depends entirely on the host platform. The MI300X's 5.32 TB/s bandwidth is a fixed hardware specification, independent of any host configuration.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications differ on nearly every field. Process node: 5 nm for the MI300X versus 4 nm for the 8050S. Die size: 1017 mm² versus 308 mm². Transistor count: 153,000 million versus unknown. Transistor density: 150.4M per mm² versus null. Base clock: 1000 MHz versus 1295 MHz. Boost clock: 2100 MHz versus 2800 MHz. The 8050S runs at higher clock speeds, but with far fewer compute units, its total throughput remains much lower.

Memory configuration: the MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth and a 1300 MHz memory clock; the 8050S uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth and no dedicated memory clock. Shading units: 19,456 versus 2,048. TMUs: 1,216 versus 128. ROPs: 0 versus 64. Ray tracing cores: null versus 32. Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s versus 179.2 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 358.4 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16: 81.72 TFLOPS versus 11.47 TFLOPS. TDP: 750 W versus 55 W. Slot width: OAM Module versus IGP. Suggested PSU: 1150 W for the MI300X, null for the 8050S. Power connectors: none for both. Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 for both. Display outputs: none for the MI300X, portable device dependent for the 8050S. APIs: none for the MI300X, DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4 for the 8050S. Release date: 2023-12-05 for the MI300X, 2025-01-05 for the 8050S. Production status: null for the MI300X, active for the 8050S. Predecessor: Radeon Instinct for the MI300X, Polaris Mobile for the 8050S. Successor: null for both. Launch MSRP: null for both.

The average benchmark score field also differs: the MI300X has a single recorded score and its average is 317,994, while the 8050S has two recorded scores (65,818 OpenCL and 58,398 Vulkan) giving an average of 62,108.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X scores 317,994, which is 383.1% higher than the AMD Radeon 8050S's 65,818. The MI300X also ranks at the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the 8050S ranks at the 89th percentile.

Q: How does the Instinct MI300X compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The MI300X trails the NVIDIA B200 by 8% (345,482 vs 317,994) and the NVIDIA H200 NVL by 5% (334,891 vs 317,994). It leads the NVIDIA L40S by 7.5% (295,763) and the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation by 10.7% (287,237).

Q: What are the memory specifications of each GPU?

A: The Instinct MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth and a 1300 MHz memory clock (5.2 Gbps effective). The Radeon 8050S uses system shared memory, with type, bus width, and bandwidth all system dependent.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: The Radeon 8050S includes 32 ray tracing cores. The Instinct MI300X lists no ray tracing cores in its specifications (null value), consistent with its compute-only design.

Q: What graphics APIs does each GPU support?

A: The Radeon 8050S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Instinct MI300X lists no graphics API support (DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all N/A) and has no display outputs.

Q: What are the TDP and form factor differences?

A: The Instinct MI300X has a 750 W TDP and uses an OAM Module form factor, with a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The Radeon 8050S has a 55 W TDP and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor), with no suggested PSU listed. Both have no power connectors.