AMD Instinct MI300X vs AMD Radeon 8060S Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between these two accelerators, with each designed for an entirely different workload class. The AMD Instinct MI300X wins the only directly comparable head-to-head measurement, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by a decisive margin. Its score of 317994 dwarfs the Radeon 8060S result of 84626, a delta of 275.8 percent. This places the MI300X at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning it outperforms every other recorded device. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA B200 at 345482 (8 percent ahead) and the NVIDIA H200 NVL at 334891 (5 percent ahead), while it sits 7.5 percent above the NVIDIA L40S and 10.7 percent above the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation.

The Radeon 8060S, by contrast, sits at the 87th percentile across all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 55757 across three tests. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly around it: the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB is essentially tied at 55698 (0.1 percent behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 scores 56083 (0.6 percent ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54828 (1.7 percent behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 scores 54247 (2.8 percent behind). The 8060S also has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2162 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 80483, neither of which the MI300X has recorded data for.

The functional split is stark. The MI300X is an OAM module with no display outputs, no graphics API support, and a 750 W TDP. It exists for compute workloads where rendering to a screen is irrelevant. The 8060S is an integrated graphics processor with portable-device-dependent display outputs, full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, and a 55 W TDP. It exists for mobile graphics where power efficiency and API compatibility matter. The benchmark data confirms this: the MI300X wins the compute test overwhelmingly, while the 8060S provides the only recorded graphics API results.

Architecture Differences

The two chips share a manufacturer and a foundry but diverge at nearly every architectural level. The MI300X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on CDNA 3.0 architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per square millimeter. The 8060S uses the Strix Halo chip built on RDNA 3.5 architecture, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC with a 308 mm² die and an unknown transistor count.

The compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The MI300X carries 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and no raster operation pipelines, resulting in a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s and a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s. The 8060S carries 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, producing a pixel rate of 185.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 464.0 GTexel/s. The 8060S also includes 40 ray tracing cores, a feature class entirely absent from the MI300X's CDNA design.

Memory architecture reflects the different deployment targets. The MI300X uses 192 GB of HBM3 across an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth at a memory clock of 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The 8060S uses system shared memory, with its size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all dependent on the host system. Base and boost clocks also diverge: the MI300X runs at 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost, while the 8060S runs at 1295 MHz base and 2900 MHz boost.

Floating-point throughput tells the story of specialization. The MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio). The 8060S delivers 14.85 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio). The MI300X is 5.5 times higher in raw FP32 throughput. Power consumption scales with that capability: 750 W for the MI300X versus 55 W for the 8060S. The MI300X has no power connectors because it is an OAM module, while the 8060S is an IGP with no power connectors either. The MI300X suggests a 1150 W power supply; the 8060S lists no suggested PSU.

Release timing also separates them. The MI300X launched on December 5, 2023, as part of the Instinct (MIx) generation, succeeding Radeon Instinct. The 8060S launched on January 5, 2025, as part of the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation, succeeding Polaris Mobile. The 8060S is marked as Active in production status; the MI300X has no recorded production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The MI300X scores 317994 against the 8060S's 84626, a 275.8 percent advantage. That is more than 3.7 times the raw score. In context, the MI300X's nearest rival, the NVIDIA H200 NVL, scores 334891, which is 5 percent higher, and the NVIDIA B200 scores 345482, which is 8 percent higher. The 8060S's OpenCL score places it among midrange desktop GPUs: its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, scores 55698, essentially identical at 0.1 percent behind, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 sits 0.6 percent ahead at 56083.

The MI300X's OpenCL score also exceeds its own average benchmark score of 317994, which is the same number because it has only one recorded benchmark. The 8060S's average of 55757 is pulled down by its Vulkan score of 80483 and Steel Nomad score of 2162, which are not directly comparable to the MI300X's results. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test measures graphics rendering performance, a domain where the MI300X has no recorded data and no API support. The Vulkan test likewise has no MI300X counterpart.

The delta between the two OpenCL scores is the largest single-test gap recorded between any two devices in their respective nearest-rival groups. The MI300X's 275.8 percent lead over the 8060S exceeds the 10.7 percent gap to the RTX 6000 Ada Generation and the 8 percent gap to the B200. The 8060S's nearest rivals, by contrast, are all within 2.8 percent of its score, indicating that its OpenCL performance sits in a tight competitive cluster rather than at an extreme.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only direct benchmark comparison?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 317994 against the AMD Radeon 8060S's 84626, a 275.8 percent advantage.

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

A: The NVIDIA H200 NVL scores 334891, 5 percent higher; the NVIDIA B200 scores 345482, 8 percent higher; the NVIDIA L40S scores 295763, 7.5 percent lower; and the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation scores 287237, 10.7 percent lower.

Q: How does the 8060S compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55698, 0.1 percent lower; the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 scores 56083, 0.6 percent higher; the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54828, 1.7 percent lower; and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 scores 54247, 2.8 percent lower.

Q: What graphics APIs does each GPU support?

A: The MI300X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The 8060S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the memory configurations?

A: The MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The 8060S uses system shared memory with size, type, bus width, and bandwidth dependent on the host system.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The MI300X has a 750 W TDP and suggests an 1150 W power supply. The 8060S has a 55 W TDP and lists no suggested power supply.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI300X | AMD Radeon 8060S |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | RDNA 3.5 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 308 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1295 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 2900 MHz |

| Memory Size | 192 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | HBM3 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 5.32 TB/s | System Dependent |

| Memory Clock | 1300 MHz 5.2 Gbps effective | null |

| Shading Units | 19456 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 1216 | 160 |

| ROPs | 0 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | null | 40 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 185.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 464.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 14.85 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) | 14.85 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 55 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | 1150 W | null |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2025-01-05 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | Polaris Mobile |

| Production Status | null | Active |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 100 | 87 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 317994 | 55757 |

The two devices share only their manufacturer, foundry, and PCIe bus interface. Everything else, from architecture and process node to memory, compute resources, API support, power, and release timing, differs. The MI300X is a data-center compute module with extreme memory capacity and throughput. The 8060S is a mobile integrated GPU with modern graphics API support and a fraction of the power draw. The benchmark data reflects this divide: one dominant OpenCL score for the MI300X, three varied scores for the 8060S, and no overlap in their competitive sets.