AMD Instinct MI300X vs AMD Radeon PRO V710 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains a single direct comparison between the AMD Instinct MI300X and the AMD Radeon PRO V710: the Geekbench OpenCL test. This benchmark measures raw compute throughput in a heterogeneous workload, and the results are decisive. The AMD Instinct MI300X scores 317994, while the AMD Radeon PRO V710 scores 116460. The MI300X leads by 173%, a margin that reflects the fundamental difference in compute scale between the two accelerators.

The 173% delta is not merely a statistical gap; it places the two products in entirely different performance strata. The MI300X's score of 317994 places it at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning no recorded GPU scores higher. Its nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA B200 (345482, 8% higher), the NVIDIA H200 NVL (334891, 5% higher), and the NVIDIA L40S (295763, 7.5% lower). The Radeon PRO V710, by contrast, sits at the 88th percentile with an average benchmark score of 58657, placing it in the company of the NVIDIA P102-100 (58528, 0.2% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT (58392, 0.5% higher), and the Intel Arc A570M (58239, 0.7% higher).

It is important to note that the Radeon PRO V710 also has a second recorded benchmark, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, where it scores 853. The MI300X has no corresponding result in that test, so no direct head-to-head comparison exists for that workload. The single available comparison, however, is unambiguous: in Geekbench OpenCL, the MI300X outperforms the V710 by more than two and a half times. This is a compute-oriented benchmark, and the MI300X's architecture is built specifically for that domain.

The absence of a head-to-head result in any graphics or real-time rendering workload means the data cannot support a claim that the MI300X wins universally. The V710's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 853, while not comparable to any MI300X number, does confirm the V710 is a functional DX12 device, a category where the MI300X has no recorded API support at all. The wins tally reflects this: the MI300X holds 1 win, the V710 holds 0 wins in direct comparisons.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X scores 317994, which is 173% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO V710's score of 116460.

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

A: The MI300X is 8% behind the NVIDIA B200 (345482), 5% behind the NVIDIA H200 NVL (334891), 7.5% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S (295763), and 10.7% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation (287237).

Q: Where does the Radeon PRO V710 sit among its nearest competitors?

A: The V710's average benchmark score of 58657 is 0.2% below the NVIDIA P102-100 (58528), 0.5% below the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT (58392), 0.7% below the Intel Arc A570M (58239), and 1% below the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM (58085).

Q: Does the MI300X support DirectX?

A: The database records its DirectX API as N/A, along with OpenGL and Vulkan also listed as N/A. The V710, by contrast, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus, while the V710 has 28 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 224-bit bus.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The MI300X delivers 5.32 TB/s, whereas the V710 delivers 504.0 GB/s, a difference of roughly tenfold in favor of the MI300X.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators descend from separate architectural lineages within AMD. The Instinct MI300X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, a design dedicated to compute acceleration. The Radeon PRO V710 uses RDNA 3.0 on the Navi 32 chip, an architecture derived from AMD's graphics-focused Radeon line. The codenames differ as well: the MI300X carries no codename in the database, while the V710 is listed under "Wheat Nas."

The process node is identical: both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The transistor budgets, however, are wildly different. The MI300X integrates 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The V710 integrates 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, for a density of 81.2M per mm². The MI300X thus carries more than five times the transistor count on roughly three times the die area.

Compute resources diverge sharply. The MI300X has 19456 shading units and 1216 texture mapping units, but its ROP count is recorded as 0 and its pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s. It has no ray tracing cores listed. The V710 has 3456 shading units, 216 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with 54 ray tracing cores and a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s. The MI300X is essentially a pure compute device, while the V710 retains the full graphics pipeline including ray tracing hardware.

The memory systems reflect the same split. The MI300X uses HBM3 with 192 GB capacity, an 8192-bit bus, and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The V710 uses GDDR6 with 28 GB capacity, a 224-bit bus, and 504.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI300X's memory clock is 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective), while the V710's is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The effective data rate per pin is higher on the V710, but the vastly wider bus on the MI300X produces far greater total bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The most visible specification difference is power. The MI300X has a TDP of 750 W and requires a suggested PSU of 1150 W; it uses an OAM Module slot width and has no power connectors. The V710 has a TDP of 158 W, a suggested PSU of 450 W, a single-slot form factor, and uses one 8-pin power connector. This is a 592 W difference in TDP, which places the MI300X in the class of high-power data center accelerators and the V710 in the class of lower-power professional cards.

Clock speeds also differ. The MI300X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The V710 has a base clock of 1900 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz. Despite the MI300X's lower base clock, its massive compute array produces far higher throughput: 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 versus 27.65 TFLOPS FP32 for the V710. Both list FP16 at the same figure as FP32 with a 1:1 ratio, so the MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP16 and the V710 delivers 27.65 TFLOPS FP16.

The bus interface differs by one generation: the MI300X uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the V710 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Neither card has display outputs, so both are intended for compute or rendering workloads that do not require direct display connection. The MI300X lists no supported graphics APIs (DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all N/A), while the V710 lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Release dates differ by roughly ten months: the MI300X was released on 2023-12-05, and the V710 on 2024-10-02. The MI300X's predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct, while the V710's predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega. Neither product has a successor listed in the database.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward division of roles. The AMD Instinct MI300X is the compute leader. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 317994 at the 100th percentile places it at the top of the entire database, and its nearest rivals are all flagship NVIDIA data center parts. Its 192 GB of HBM3 memory and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, combined with 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, make it suitable for workloads that demand maximum memory capacity and compute throughput. The 173% lead over the V710 in OpenCL is the single largest margin in the recorded head-to-head data.

The AMD Radeon PRO V710 is not a compute rival to the MI300X. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 116460 is less than half the MI300X's score, and its average benchmark score of 58657 places it near the NVIDIA P102-100, the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT, and the Intel Arc A570M, all within 1% of each other. The V710 does offer capabilities the MI300X lacks: a full graphics API stack (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4), ray tracing cores, ROPs, and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 853. Its 158 W TDP and single-slot form factor also make it far easier to integrate into systems with modest power delivery.

The choice between the two depends entirely on the workload. For compute-bound tasks where the database records a benchmark result, the MI300X is the correct selection. For tasks requiring graphics API support, ray tracing, or lower power consumption, the V710 is the only one of the two with recorded support for those features.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300X wins in raw compute throughput. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 317994 exceeds the V710's 116460 by 173%, and its 100th percentile ranking among all GPUs indicates no recorded GPU scores higher. It also wins on memory capacity (192 GB versus 28 GB), memory bandwidth (5.32 TB/s versus 504.0 GB/s), memory bus width (8192 bit versus 224 bit), FP32 throughput (81.72 TFLOPS versus 27.65 TFLOPS), and texture rate (2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 432.0 GTexel/s). Its transistor count of 153,000 million versus 28,100 million and die size of 1017 mm² versus 346 mm² further underscore the scale difference. The MI300X also holds a PCIe generation advantage with PCIe 5.0 x16 over the V710's PCIe 4.0 x16.

The AMD Radeon PRO V710 wins in every category related to graphics functionality. It has 96 ROPs and a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s, while the MI300X has 0 ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. It has 54 ray tracing cores to the MI300X's none. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI300X lists N/A for all three. It also records a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 853, a test for which the MI300X has no recorded result. The V710 wins on power efficiency: 158 W TDP versus 750 W, and a suggested PSU of 450 W versus 1150 W. It also uses a standard 8-pin power connector and a single-slot form factor, whereas the MI300X uses an OAM Module with no power connectors. The V710's base clock of 1900 MHz is higher than the MI300X's 1000 MHz, though its boost clock of 2000 MHz is slightly lower than the MI300X's 2100 MHz.

The V710 also wins on relevance to systems with standard PCIe power delivery and modest cooling. Its release date of 2024-10-02 makes it the newer product, and its predecessor lineage (Radeon Pro Vega) indicates a professional graphics focus. The MI300X, released 2023-12-05, is the older part but remains the compute flagship in the database. The data does not record a single benchmark where the V710 beats the MI300X; the wins tally is 1 for the MI300X and 0 for the V710. The V710's advantages are functional and architectural, not performance-based in the recorded head-to-head tests.