AMD Instinct MI300X vs AMD Radeon 820M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300X and AMD Radeon 820M occupy completely different segments of the GPU spectrum. The MI300X is a data center accelerator designed for massive compute workloads, while the Radeon 820M is a mobile integrated graphics processor for portable devices. The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmarks between these two parts, and the benchmark database contains a single OpenCL score for the MI300X (317,994) while the Radeon 820M has no recorded benchmark entries at all.

The MI300X wins decisively in every compute-oriented category. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994 places it at the 100th percentile against all GPUs in the database. The Radeon 820M sits at the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of zero due to lacking recorded measurements. For any workload that relies on raw floating-point throughput, memory bandwidth, or shading capacity, the MI300X dominates.

The Radeon 820M wins in the categories that matter for mobile integration. It consumes 15 W versus 750 W for the MI300X, which makes it suitable for battery-powered portable devices where the MI300X requires a dedicated 1150 W power supply recommendation. The 820M includes display outputs that are portable device dependent, while the MI300X provides no outputs at all. The 820M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the MI300X reports N/A for all three graphics APIs, confirming it is not a rendering-oriented product.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The MI300X uses CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation. The Radeon 820M uses RDNA 3.5 architecture on the Krackan Point 2 chip, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, and belongs to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation.

The MI300X packs 153,000 million transistors across a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per square millimeter. The Radeon 820M's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database. The MI300X features 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs, consistent with its compute-focused design. The Radeon 820M has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, 4 ROPs, and 2 ray tracing cores. The MI300X has no ray tracing cores listed.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The MI300X uses 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth with a memory clock of 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The Radeon 820M uses system shared memory, with system dependent bandwidth. Clock speeds also differ: the MI300X runs at 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost, while the Radeon 820M runs at 400 MHz base and 2800 MHz boost. The higher boost clock on the 820M reflects its smaller, power-limited design.

The MI300X uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface and an OAM Module slot width, with no power connectors. The Radeon 820M uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and is an IGP with no power connectors. The MI300X has no display outputs, while the 820M's outputs are portable device dependent.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two products. However, the MI300X's single recorded Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994 provides a reference point. This score places the MI300X at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning it outperforms every other recorded GPU.

Comparison with nearest rivals in the database confirms the MI300X's position. The NVIDIA H200 NVL averages 334,891, which is 5% higher than the MI300X. The NVIDIA B200 averages 345,482, 8% higher. The MI300X sits above the NVIDIA L40S, which averages 295,763, meaning the MI300X is 7.5% ahead of the L40S. The MI300X also leads the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation, which averages 287,237, putting the MI300X 10.7% ahead.

The Radeon 820M has no recorded benchmark scores and no nearest rivals listed in the database. Its percentile ranking of 50 indicates it sits at the median of all GPUs, but without measured data, the database cannot quantify its performance relative to any competitor. The fp32 throughput figures illustrate the scale of difference: the MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS, while the Radeon 820M delivers 716.8 GFLOPS, which is roughly 0.72 TFLOPS. The MI300X's texture rate reaches 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s for the 820M. Pixel rates show the 820M at 11.20 GPixel/s versus effectively zero for the MI300X, which has no ROPs.

FAQ

Q: Can the AMD Instinct MI300X output video to a display?

A: No. The database lists display outputs as "No outputs" for the MI300X. It also reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan API support.

Q: What type of memory does the AMD Radeon 820M use?

A: The Radeon 820M uses System Shared memory. Its memory size, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as system shared or system dependent, meaning they vary with the host system configuration.

Q: How does the MI300X compare to NVIDIA H200 NVL in benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA H200 NVL has an average score of 334,891, which is 5% higher than the MI300X's 317,994.

Q: Does the Radeon 820M support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The Radeon 820M lists 2 ray tracing cores. The MI300X does not list any ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Radeon 820M is listed as Active in production. The MI300X has no production status recorded in the database.

Q: When was each product released?

A: The MI300X has a release date of 2023-12-05, and the Radeon 820M has a release date of 2025-02-28.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification field. The MI300X uses CDNA 3.0 architecture, while the Radeon 820M uses RDNA 3.5. The process nodes differ: 5 nm for the MI300X versus 4 nm for the 820M. The MI300X has 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die; the 820M's transistor count and die size are unknown.

Clock speeds: the MI300X runs at 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost with a 1300 MHz memory clock (5.2 Gbps effective). The Radeon 820M runs at 400 MHz base and 2800 MHz boost with system shared memory. Memory capacity: 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth for the MI300X, versus system shared memory for the 820M.

Compute resources: the MI300X has 19,456 shading units, 1,216 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. The Radeon 820M has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, 4 ROPs, and 2 RT cores. Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s for the MI300X versus 11.20 GPixel/s for the 820M. Texture rate: 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s. FP32 performance: 81.72 TFLOPS versus 716.8 GFLOPS. FP16 performance mirrors FP32 at 1:1 ratio for both.

Power and physical specifications: the MI300X has a 750 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 1150 W and an OAM Module slot width. The Radeon 820M has a 15 W TDP with no suggested PSU and an IGP slot width. Both have no power connectors. Bus interfaces differ: PCIe 5.0 x16 for the MI300X, PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 820M. Display outputs: none for the MI300X, portable device dependent for the 820M. API support: N/A for the MI300X across DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan; DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 for the 820M.

Release dates: 2023-12-05 for the MI300X, 2025-02-28 for the Radeon 820M. The MI300X's predecessor is Radeon Instinct, while the 820M's predecessor is Navi II IGP. Neither has a successor listed. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded.

The Verdict

The data presents two products with no meaningful overlap in intended use. The AMD Instinct MI300X is a compute accelerator with enormous resources: 19,456 shading units, 192 GB of HBM3, 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, and 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. Its benchmark score of 317,994 places it at the 100th percentile, ahead of the NVIDIA L40S by 7.5% and the RTX 6000 Ada Generation by 10.7%, while trailing the H200 NVL by 5% and the B200 by 8%. It has no display outputs and no graphics API support, confirming its role as a server-side compute engine. Its 750 W TDP and 1150 W suggested PSU make it a data center component.

The AMD Radeon 820M is a 15 W integrated GPU for portable devices. It uses system shared memory, has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, 4 ROPs, and 2 ray tracing cores. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and provides display outputs dependent on the host device. Its 2800 MHz boost clock is higher than the MI300X's 2100 MHz, but its FP32 output of 716.8 GFLOPS places it in a different performance universe. The database records no benchmark scores for the 820M, so its percentile rank of 50 reflects its median position without measured data.

For compute workloads that demand massive parallelism and memory bandwidth, the MI300X is the clear choice based on the recorded data. For integrated graphics in a portable device with modest rendering needs and minimal power draw, the Radeon 820M serves that role. The choice between them is not a performance comparison but a platform decision: a server accelerator versus a mobile IGP. The MI300X's predecessor was Radeon Instinct, and it launched in December 2023. The Radeon 820M's predecessor was Navi II IGP, and it launched in February 2025. Neither product has a successor recorded in the database.