AMD Instinct MI300X vs AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X Comparison

The AMD Instinct MI300X and the AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X share the same physical chip, the Aqua Vanjaram, and the same CDNA 3.0 architecture. The database records one benchmark score for the Instinct MI300X, a Geekbench OpenCL result of 317994, placing it at the 100th percentile among all tested GPUs. The Radeon Instinct MI300X has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, leaving its average benchmark score at zero. This asymmetry in recorded data defines the comparison.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table between these two items is empty. No direct comparative tests exist in the database. The only quantitative performance data available belongs to the AMD Instinct MI300X, which achieved a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317994. This score places it at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning no other tested GPU scores higher.

The nearest rivals for the Instinct MI300X provide context for this score. The NVIDIA B200 leads with an average score of 345482, which is 8 percent higher than the Instinct MI300X. The NVIDIA H200 NVL follows closely with 334891, a 5 percent advantage. The Instinct MI300X outperforms the NVIDIA L40S, which scores 295763, by 7.5 percent. Against the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation, the Instinct MI300X is 10.7 percent ahead, as that card scores 287237.

The Radeon Instinct MI300X has no recorded scores, no rivals, and no wins. The database shows zero wins for each product in the head-to-head comparison. The Instinct MI300X has a single win by default, as it holds the only recorded benchmark result between the two. The Radeon Instinct MI300X cannot be compared numerically to any other product, including its near-identical sibling.

The difference in recorded data does not reflect hardware capability. Both products use the same chip, architecture, and clock specifications for base and boost frequencies. The absence of benchmark data for the Radeon Instinct MI300X means the database cannot verify its performance characteristics through measurements. The Instinct MI300X, by contrast, has a verified score that places it in the top percentile.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear division: the AMD Instinct MI300X is the only one of the two with recorded performance metrics. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 317994 confirms it operates at the 100th percentile, outperforming the NVIDIA L40S by 7.5 percent and the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation by 10.7 percent. The NVIDIA H200 NVL and B200 remain ahead by 5 percent and 8 percent respectively, but the Instinct MI300X sits comfortably among the fastest accelerators in the database.

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X has no recorded measurements. Its percentile sits at 50, which is the median default for an unmeasured product. The average benchmark score of zero confirms the absence of data. Any user relying on the database to compare these two products will find only one side with evidence.

For those selecting between the two, the choice rests on the naming and the available data. The Instinct MI300X has verifiable performance. The Radeon Instinct MI300X does not. The specifications are otherwise identical: same 5 nm process, same 153,000 million transistors, same 1017 mm² die size, same 192 GB HBM3 memory, same 8192 bit bus width, same 19456 shading units, same 1216 TMUs, same 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, same 750 W TDP, same OAM Module slot width, and same PCIe 5.0 x16 interface.

The database cannot confirm whether the Radeon Instinct MI300X would match the Instinct MI300X in OpenCL performance. Given the shared chip and architecture, a reasonable expectation exists, but the recorded data does not support that claim. The verdict from the database is straightforward: the Instinct MI300X delivers measured performance at the top of the chart, while the Radeon Instinct MI300X remains an unverified entry.

FAQ

Q: What is the only recorded benchmark score for either product?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317994. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X has no recorded benchmark scores.

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

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

Q: What percentile does each product occupy?

A: The Instinct MI300X sits at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Radeon Instinct MI300X sits at the 50th percentile, the default for a product without recorded scores.

Q: Do the two products share the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both have 192 GB of HBM3 memory with an 8192 bit bus width. The Instinct MI300X has a memory bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s, while the Radeon Instinct MI300X has a memory bandwidth of 10.3 TB/s.

Q: What are the FP32 and FP16 performance figures for each?

A: Both products deliver 81.72 TFLOPS FP32. The Instinct MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The Radeon Instinct MI300X delivers 653.7 TFLOPS FP16 at an 8:1 ratio.

Q: Which product has a higher boost clock?

A: Both products have a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The memory clocks differ: the Instinct MI300X runs at 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective, while the Radeon Instinct MI300X runs at 2525 MHz with 10.1 Gbps effective.

Specification Differences

The two products differ in several recorded fields. The memory clock shows a significant gap. The Instinct MI300X lists a memory clock of 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective. The Radeon Instinct MI300X lists a memory clock of 2525 MHz with 10.1 Gbps effective. This doubling of the effective data rate explains the bandwidth difference.

Memory bandwidth follows the clock change. The Instinct MI300X records 5.32 TB/s. The Radeon Instinct MI300X records 10.3 TB/s. Both use HBM3 memory across an 8192 bit bus, but the higher clock on the Radeon Instinct MI300X doubles the theoretical throughput.

FP16 performance differs as well. The Instinct MI300X lists 81.72 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning it matches the FP32 rate. The Radeon Instinct MI300X lists 653.7 TFLOPS FP16 at an 8:1 ratio, meaning it uses a packed arithmetic path that delivers eight times the FP32 rate for FP16 operations.

The generation field also differs. The Instinct MI300X belongs to the "Instinct (MIx)" generation. The Radeon Instinct MI300X belongs to the "Radeon Instinct (MIx)" generation. The predecessor names differ: the Instinct MI300X lists "Radeon Instinct" as its predecessor, while the Radeon Instinct MI300X lists "FirePro Data Center."

The API fields show a minor difference. The Instinct MI300X lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as "N/A." The Radeon Instinct MI300X lists these fields as null. Both effectively indicate no consumer graphics API support, but the database records them differently.

All other specifications match exactly. Process node, foundry, transistor count, die size, transistor density, base clock, boost clock, memory size, memory type, bus width, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, pixel rate, texture rate, FP32, TDP, slot width, power connectors, suggested PSU, bus interface, display outputs, and dimensions are identical.

Architecture Differences

Both products use the same Aqua Vanjaram chip fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The transistor count is 153,000 million, and the die size is 1017 mm². The transistor density is 150.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The architecture is CDNA 3.0 for both.

The compute layout is identical. Each has 19456 shading units and 1216 texture mapping units. The ROP count is zero, and the pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s. The texture rate is 2553.6 GTexel/s. No ray tracing cores or tensor cores are recorded for either product. The FP32 throughput is 81.72 TFLOPS for both.

The memory architecture differs in clock behavior. The Instinct MI300X runs its HBM3 stack at 1300 MHz, yielding 5.2 Gbps effective and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The Radeon Instinct MI300X runs the same HBM3 stack at 2525 MHz, yielding 10.1 Gbps effective and 10.3 TB/s bandwidth. The bus width remains 8192 bit for both, so the doubling of bandwidth comes entirely from the higher memory clock.

The FP16 execution path differs. The Instinct MI300X uses a 1:1 FP16 rate, delivering 81.72 TFLOPS. The Radeon Instinct MI300X uses an 8:1 FP16 rate, delivering 653.7 TFLOPS. This suggests a different instruction path for packed FP16 operations, even though the underlying chip is the same. The database records these as separate products with different characteristics.

Both products consume 750 W and require a suggested PSU of 1150 W. Both use an OAM Module slot width with no power connectors, indicating a baseboard-level power delivery system. Both connect via PCIe 5.0 x16 and have no display outputs. Both were released on the same date, December 5, 2023.

Where Each One Wins

The Instinct MI300X wins in the only measurable category: recorded benchmark performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 317994 places it at the 100th percentile. It beats the NVIDIA L40S by 7.5 percent and the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation by 10.7 percent. It trails the NVIDIA H200 NVL by 5 percent and the NVIDIA B200 by 8 percent. Any workload relying on OpenCL performance as measured by Geekbench would favor the Instinct MI300X based on the data.

The Radeon Instinct MI300X wins in memory bandwidth. The recorded 10.3 TB/s exceeds the Instinct MI300X's 5.32 TB/s by a wide margin. This advantage applies to memory-bound workloads where data movement dominates computation. The Radeon Instinct MI300X also wins in FP16 throughput, with 653.7 TFLOPS versus 81.72 TFLOPS, a difference that favors workloads using reduced-precision arithmetic with packed operations. The higher memory clock of 2525 MHz versus 1300 MHz directly enables the bandwidth advantage.

The database records no wins for either product in the head-to-head table, as that table is empty. The wins discussed here derive from the specification differences and the single benchmark score. The Instinct MI300X holds the performance record. The Radeon Instinct MI300X holds the memory and FP16 specifications.

For users prioritizing measured OpenCL performance, the Instinct MI300X is the only option with data. For users prioritizing theoretical memory bandwidth or FP16 throughput, the Radeon Instinct MI300X offers higher numbers, though no benchmark confirms real-world gains. Both products share the same compute core count, FP32 rate, and power envelope, so the choice between them hinges on whether the memory clock and FP16 ratio matter more than a verified benchmark score.