AMD Instinct MI300X vs Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data provides only a single direct benchmark result for the AMD Instinct MI300X, the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it scores 317,994 points. This score places the MI300X at the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database, indicating it outperforms every other recorded GPU in this specific workload. For the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550, the database contains no benchmark entries, resulting in an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile rank of 50. This absence of recorded data for the Intel part means a direct head-to-head numerical comparison is only possible by evaluating the AMD part against its nearest rivals, rather than against the Intel part.

The MI300X's score of 317,994 positions it within a tightly contested field of high-end accelerators. The database shows that the NVIDIA B200 achieves a higher average score of 345,482, placing the MI300X 8% behind that part. Similarly, the NVIDIA H200 NVL records an average score of 334,891, which is 5% higher than the MI300X's result. Conversely, the MI300X holds a clear advantage over other competitors. It outperforms the NVIDIA L40S, which scores 295,763, by a margin of 7.5%. The AMD part also leads the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation, which scores 287,237, by 10.7%. These deltas show that while the MI300X is not the absolute fastest accelerator in the database, it delivers a robust performance that is competitive with the top-tier NVIDIA offerings.

Because the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has no benchmark scores, its wins cannot be quantified. The data shows zero wins for both the AMD and Intel parts in the head-to-head comparison table. The only measurable wins belong to the MI300X, which are its margins over the L40S and RTX 6000 Ada Generation as detailed above. The Intel part's performance is entirely unrecorded in the database, leaving no numerical basis to assess its strengths or weaknesses against the MI300X.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300X demonstrates its strengths through the available benchmark data. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994 confirms a capability to lead in compute-heavy workloads, as evidenced by its 7.5% and 10.7% margins over the NVIDIA L40S and RTX 6000 Ada Generation, respectively. The MI300X also shows a competitive profile against even faster accelerators, sitting only 5% behind the H200 NVL and 8% behind the B200. This suggests that the MI300X is a strong performer in general-purpose compute tasks that leverage OpenCL, offering performance that is near the top of the database rankings.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has no recorded benchmark results. Consequently, the database offers no evidence of any workload where this part secures a win. Its performance characteristics are undefined by the measured data. The only certainties are its hardware specifications, which describe a capable accelerator, but without benchmark scores, no use-case victories can be attributed to it.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators are built on fundamentally different architectures and process technologies. The AMD Instinct MI300X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture with the Aqua Vanjaram chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 153,000 million transistors on a die size of 1017 mm², yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 employs the Generation 12.5 architecture with the Ponte Vecchio chip, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. This chip contains 100,000 million transistors across a larger die size of 1280 mm², resulting in a lower transistor density of 78.1 million per mm². The data shows that AMD achieves higher transistor density through its more advanced process node.

Memory subsystems differ substantially. The MI300X is equipped with 192 GB of HBM3 memory, running at an effective speed of 5.2 Gbps, delivering a bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s. The Intel part offers 128 GB of HBM2e memory with an effective speed of 3.2 Gbps and a bandwidth of 3.28 TB/s. Both parts use an 8192-bit memory bus, but the MI300X's newer HBM3 technology provides significantly higher bandwidth and capacity. The base and boost clocks also favor the AMD part, with 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost, compared to the Intel part's 900 MHz base and 1600 MHz boost.

Compute resources show a similar pattern. The MI300X features 19,456 shading units and 1,216 texture mapping units, producing a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s. It delivers 81.72 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 operations. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 contains 16,384 shading units and 1,024 texture mapping units, with a texture rate of 1,638.4 GTexel/s. Its FP32 and FP16 performance is 52.43 TFLOPS. The AMD part holds a clear lead in raw compute throughput. The Intel part does include 128 ray tracing cores, a feature that the MI300X does not list. Both parts have a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s and no display outputs, confirming their purpose as compute accelerators rather than graphics cards.

Power requirements differ, with the MI300X rated at a 750 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The Intel part has a 600 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The AMD accelerator is therefore more power-hungry, which aligns with its higher performance figures. Both use an OAM module slot width and a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. The MI300X does not list power connectors, while the Intel part does not provide a power connector entry. API support also diverges: the Intel part lists DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, whereas the AMD part reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the AMD Instinct MI300X for any user prioritizing measured compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994 places it at the 100th percentile, and it holds decisive leads over the NVIDIA L40S and RTX 6000 Ada Generation. The hardware specifications reinforce this position, with the MI300X offering more memory, higher bandwidth, faster clocks, and greater FP32 throughput than the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550. The Intel part, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores, so the database provides no evidence of its performance level. For workloads where OpenCL performance is the deciding factor, the MI300X is the only part with measurable results, and those results are strong.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 does offer certain specification advantages. It includes 128 ray tracing cores, which the MI300X does not list, and it provides API support for DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6, which the AMD part lacks. The Intel part also has a lower TDP of 600 W compared to 750 W, potentially simplifying power delivery requirements. However, without any benchmark scores, these features cannot be translated into demonstrated performance wins. The data indicates that the Intel part is an active production product, released earlier in January 2023, while the MI300X followed in December 2023. The MI300X also has a predecessor, Radeon Instinct, while the Intel part lists the H3C Graphics as its successor. For a buyer strictly evaluating recorded data, the MI300X is the superior choice based on its benchmark score, its percentile ranking, and its comprehensive hardware lead.

FAQ

Q: What is the Geekbench OpenCL score for the AMD Instinct MI300X?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X records a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994.

Q: Does the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No, the database contains no benchmark entries for the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550, giving it an average benchmark score of zero.

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

A: The MI300X scores 317,994, while the NVIDIA H200 NVL has an average score of 334,891, placing the MI300X 5% behind the H200 NVL.

Q: What memory configuration does each accelerator use?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X uses 192 GB of HBM3 memory with a bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 uses 128 GB of HBM2e memory with a bandwidth of 3.28 TB/s.

Q: What are the FP32 performance figures for the two parts?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS for FP32 operations, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 delivers 52.43 TFLOPS.

Q: Which accelerator has ray tracing cores?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 includes 128 ray tracing cores. The AMD Instinct MI300X does not list any ray tracing cores in its specifications.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI300X | Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 |

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

| Process Node | 5 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | 100,000 million |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 1280 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | 78.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 1600 MHz |

| Memory Size | 192 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3 | HBM2e |

| Memory Bandwidth | 5.32 TB/s | 3.28 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 19,456 | 16,384 |

| Texture Mapping Units | 1,216 | 1,024 |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 1,638.4 GTexel/s |

| Ray Tracing Cores | Not listed | 128 |

| FP32 Performance | 81.72 TFLOPS | 52.43 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) | 52.43 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 600 W |

| Suggested PSU | 1150 W | 1000 W |

| DirectX Support | N/A | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL Support | N/A | 4.6 |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2023-01-09 |

| Production Status | Not listed | Active |

| Successor | Not listed | H3C Graphics |