AMD Instinct MI300X vs Intel Arc G3 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The data splits cleanly by workload class and platform role. The AMD Instinct MI300X is a compute-density monster, built for datacenter-scale floating-point work. The Intel Arc G3 is an integrated graphics processor aimed at portable devices, with a completely different set of priorities.

In raw compute, the MI300X wins every category that matters for server acceleration. Its FP32 output is 81.72 TFLOPS, which is more than 13 times the Arc G3's 6.144 TFLOPS. Texture rate tells the same story: the MI300X delivers 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s for the Arc G3. The MI300X also carries 192 GB of HBM3 memory with 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth, while the Arc G3 relies on System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth. None of these are close contests.

The Arc G3 wins in the areas that matter for an integrated part. Its pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, while the MI300X records 0 MPixel/s because it has no ROPs at all. The Arc G3 has 20 ROPs and 10 ray tracing cores; the MI300X has zero ROPs and no listed RT cores. The Arc G3 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300X lists N/A for all three APIs. For a portable device, the Arc G3 is the only one of the two that can drive a display output, as its display outputs are Portable Device Dependent, whereas the MI300X has No outputs.

The power envelope is equally decisive. The MI300X has a 750 W TDP and requires a 1150 W suggested PSU. The Arc G3 runs at 25 W and uses no power connectors. The MI300X is an OAM Module; the Arc G3 is an IGP. These are not competing products in the same segment. The MI300X exists to fill server racks, the Arc G3 to sit inside a mobile processor.

Benchmark data availability also differs. The MI300X has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317994, which places it at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Arc G3 has no recorded benchmark scores, an average score of 0, and sits at the 50th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different foundries and process nodes. The MI300X uses a 5 nm process at TSMC and is built on CDNA 3.0 architecture with the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The Arc G3 uses a 3 nm process at Intel and is built on Xe3-LPG architecture with the Panther Lake chip. The MI300X is part of the Instinct (MIx) generation; the Arc G3 is part of the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation.

The MI300X packs 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The Arc G3's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database. The MI300X is a discrete accelerator with a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface; the Arc G3 is an integrated part with an IGP bus interface.

Compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The MI300X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 TMUs. The Arc G3 has 1,280 shading units and 40 TMUs. The MI300X has no ROPs, while the Arc G3 has 20. The Arc G3 includes 10 ray tracing cores; the MI300X has none listed. Clock behavior also differs: the MI300X runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost, while the Arc G3 runs at a 300 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost. The MI300X's memory clock is 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective, while the Arc G3 uses System Shared memory with no dedicated clock.

FP16 behavior separates the two as well. The MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning FP16 throughput matches FP32. The Arc G3 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning FP16 runs at twice the FP32 rate. This indicates the Arc G3 is tuned for workloads that benefit from reduced precision, while the MI300X treats both precisions equally.

The API support gap is complete. The MI300X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, which is consistent with a compute accelerator that has no display outputs. The Arc G3 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it a full graphics solution for consumer and mobile software stacks.

Release timing differs by roughly two and a half years. The MI300X was released on 2023-12-05, while the Arc G3 is dated 2026-05-31. The MI300X's predecessor is Radeon Instinct; the Arc G3 has no predecessor listed. The Arc G3's production status is Active, while the MI300X's production status is not recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, which is 13.3 times the Arc G3's 6.144 TFLOPS.

Q: Can the MI300X render graphics or output video?

A: No. The MI300X has 0 ROPs, a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, No outputs, and N/A API support for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The Arc G3 has 20 ROPs, a 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, and full API support.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192 bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The Arc G3 uses System Shared memory with System Shared bus width and System Dependent bandwidth.

Q: What is the power requirement difference?

A: The MI300X has a 750 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The Arc G3 has a 25 W TDP and no power connectors or suggested PSU listed.

Q: Does the Arc G3 support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The Arc G3 has 10 ray tracing cores. The MI300X has no ray tracing cores listed.

Q: Which part has better benchmark standing in the database?

A: The MI300X has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317994 and sits at the 100th percentile. The Arc G3 has no benchmark scores recorded and sits at the 50th percentile.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two items differ.

| Field | AMD Instinct MI300X | Intel Arc G3 |

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

| Manufacturer | AMD | Intel |

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | Panther Lake |

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Xe3-LPG |

| Generation | Instinct (MIx) | Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1300 MHz 5.2 Gbps effective | System Shared |

| 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 |

| Shading Units | 19456 | 1280 |

| TMUs | 1216 | 40 |

| ROPs | 0 | 20 |

| RT Cores | null | 10 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 48.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 96.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 6.144 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) | 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 25 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Suggested PSU | 1150 W | null |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | IGP |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Production Status | null | Active |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2026-05-31 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | null |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 317994 | 0 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 100 | 50 |

| Nearest Rivals | NVIDIA H200 NVL, NVIDIA L40S, NVIDIA B200, NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation | none |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the MI300X and the Arc G3. The comparison therefore relies on the MI300X's recorded Geekbench OpenCL result and the Arc G3's absence of any recorded scores.

The MI300X scores 317994 in Geekbench OpenCL. That places it at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in the database are all NVIDIA parts. It trails the NVIDIA B200, which scores 345482, by 8 percent. It trails the NVIDIA H200 NVL, which scores 334891, by 5 percent. It leads the NVIDIA L40S, which scores 295763, by 7.5 percent. It leads the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation, which scores 287237, by 10.7 percent. These deltas show the MI300X sits in the upper tier of the database's recorded accelerators, close to the top but not the single highest scorer.

The Arc G3 has no benchmarks in the database. Its average score is 0 and its percentile is 50. With no nearest rivals listed, there is no external reference point for its measured performance. The only quantitative performance data available for the Arc G3 comes from its specification sheet: 6.144 TFLOPS FP32, 12.29 TFLOPS FP16, 96.00 GTexel/s texture rate, and 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate.

The compute gap between the two is stark. In FP32, the MI300X is 75.576 TFLOPS ahead, which is roughly 13.3 times the Arc G3's total FP32 throughput. In texture rate, the MI300X is 2,457.6 GTexel/s ahead. In memory bandwidth, the MI300X provides 5.32 TB/s of dedicated HBM3 bandwidth, while the Arc G3's bandwidth is System Dependent and therefore unquantified in the database.

The Arc G3 does hold advantages in the graphics-specific fields. Its 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate compares to 0 MPixel/s for the MI300X. Its 20 ROPs and 10 ray tracing cores give it hardware paths for rasterization and ray tracing that the MI300X does not provide at all. Its API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 means it can run graphics workloads natively, something the MI300X cannot do.

Power efficiency also favors the Arc G3 on paper. At 25 W TDP versus 750 W, the Arc G3 uses 3.3 percent of the MI300X's power budget. Its FP32 per watt is 0.24576 TFLOPS per watt, while the MI300X delivers 0.10896 TFLOPS per watt. That means the Arc G3 is about 2.3 times more efficient in FP32 per watt, though this is an apples-to-oranges comparison given the entirely different packaging and thermal designs. The MI300X is an OAM Module with a 1150 W suggested PSU; the Arc G3 is an IGP with no external power requirement.

The Verdict

The data describes two devices with almost no overlap in purpose. The AMD Instinct MI300X is a datacenter compute accelerator. Its 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, 192 GB HBM3, 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, and 750 W TDP position it for large-scale AI and HPC workloads. Its 100th percentile Geekbench OpenCL score of 317994 confirms it ranks at the top of the database's recorded GPUs, with its nearest measured rivals being the NVIDIA B200, H200 NVL, L40S, and RTX 6000 Ada Generation. Buyers in this segment are choosing among the MI300X and those NVIDIA parts, and the deltas are single-digit percentages in either direction.

The Intel Arc G3 is an integrated graphics processor for portable devices. Its 25 W TDP, IGP bus interface, and Portable Device Dependent display outputs place it inside a mobile chip rather than a standalone card. Its 10 ray tracing cores, 20 ROPs, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support make it a functional graphics solution, which the MI300X categorically is not. Its FP16 2:1 ratio of 12.29 TFLOPS shows it can accelerate mixed-precision workloads beyond its FP32 rate, a useful trait for on-device inference in a power-constrained setting.

For whom does each make sense? The MI300X is the choice for anyone running server-side floating-point workloads that can use 192 GB of HBM3 and 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth, and who does not need display output or graphics APIs. The Arc G3 is the choice for a portable device that needs integrated graphics, ray tracing, and modern API support within a 25 W envelope. Neither can substitute for the other. The MI300X cannot render a frame or output to a screen; the Arc G3 has no recorded compute benchmark and its bandwidth is System Dependent, so it cannot be positioned as a compute accelerator on the same scale.

The database's verdict is straightforward: the MI300X wins every measurable compute category, and the Arc G3 wins every graphics and efficiency category. The 100th versus 50th percentile gap in the database reflects that the MI300X has been measured against all other GPUs, while the Arc G3 has no measurements at all. Selecting between them is a question of workload, not of which is better in absolute terms. The MI300X is the accelerator for datacenter compute; the Arc G3 is the integrated graphics core for mobile devices.