AMD Instinct MI300X vs Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains only one benchmark score for the AMD Instinct MI300X, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has no benchmark entries at all. This makes a direct numerical comparison impossible for most tests, but the single available measurement is decisive. The AMD Instinct MI300X scores 317,994 in Geekbench OpenCL, placing it at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile sits at the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of zero, meaning it has no recorded performance data to compare against.

The MI300X's nearest rivals provide context for its score. The NVIDIA H200 NVL leads with an average score of 334,891, which is 5% higher than the MI300X. The NVIDIA B200 posts 345,482, an 8% advantage. On the other side, the NVIDIA L40S scores 295,763, trailing the MI300X by 7.5%, and the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation scores 287,237, which is 10.7% behind. These deltas show the MI300X positioned firmly in the upper tier of accelerator-class hardware, within striking distance of the top H200 and B200 parts while clearly ahead of the L40S and RTX 6000 Ada.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile offers no comparable benchmark data. Its 50th percentile ranking is based on an average score of zero, which the database records as the absence of any test results. Without a Geekbench OpenCL score or any other benchmark entry, there is no numerical basis to assess its performance relative to the MI300X. The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, and neither product records a win in any test category.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the available data, the AMD Instinct MI300X wins in every measurable category because it is the only one of the two with recorded performance results. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994 demonstrates compute capability that the Intel part cannot match in the database. The MI300X also holds the advantage in shading units, with 19,456 versus 192 for the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile. Texture mapping units follow the same pattern: 1,216 for AMD, 12 for Intel. The pixel rate difference is stark, as the MI300X records 0 MPixel/s while the Intel part achieves 4,000 GPixel/s, although this reflects the AMD accelerator's lack of display outputs rather than a performance deficiency.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile wins in the categories of power efficiency and integration. Its thermal design power is 6 W, compared to 750 W for the MI300X. It is an integrated graphics processor, or IGP, meaning it occupies no expansion slot and uses the system's shared memory. The MI300X, by contrast, is an OAM Module with no power connectors listed and no display outputs, indicating it is designed for server or compute environments rather than client systems. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI300X lists N/A for all three APIs, confirming the AMD product is not intended for graphics rendering workloads.

The use-case split is clear. The MI300X serves compute-intensive acceleration roles where raw throughput matters. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile serves basic display and light acceleration duties in portable devices. The data shows no overlap in their intended functions.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI300X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on a chip codenamed Aqua Vanjaram, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses the Xe-LP architecture on a chip codenamed Twin Lake, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The manufacturing process difference is significant: 5 nm versus 10 nm, and the foundries differ as well, with AMD using TSMC and Intel using its own fabs.

The MI300X integrates 153,000 million transistors on a die size of 1,017 mm², yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The Intel part lists transistor count and die size as unknown, with no density figure. The memory subsystems are entirely different. The MI300X uses 192 GB of HBM3 with an 8,192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks run at 1,300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective data rate. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses system shared memory for capacity, type, and bus width, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. Its memory clock is also system shared.

The compute resources scale accordingly. The MI300X has 19,456 shading units, 1,216 TMUs, and 0 ROPs, with a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s and FP32 throughput of 81.72 TFLOPS. FP16 runs at the same 81.72 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The Intel part has 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 4 ROPs, with a texture rate of 12.00 GTexel/s and FP32 of 384.0 GFLOPS. FP16 is 768.0 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The pixel rate for the MI300X is 0 MPixel/s, while the Intel part reaches 4.000 GPixel/s.

Clock behavior also differs. The MI300X has a base clock of 1,000 MHz and a boost clock of 2,100 MHz. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost of 1,000 MHz. The bus interface tells the story of their roles: the MI300X uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus. The MI300X has a TDP of 750 W and a suggested PSU of 1,150 W, while the Intel part draws 6 W and lists no PSU recommendation.

The MI300X has no display outputs, while the Intel part's outputs are portable device dependent. API support mirrors this: the AMD product has no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, while the Intel product supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Release dates differ by about a year: the MI300X launched on December 5, 2023, and the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile launched on December 31, 2024. The MI300X's predecessor is Radeon Instinct, while the Intel part lists no predecessor. Production status is active for the Intel part, and no status is listed for the AMD part.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X records a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has no benchmark entries, with an average score of zero.

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

A: The MI300X trails the NVIDIA H200 NVL by 5% and the NVIDIA B200 by 8%. It leads the NVIDIA L40S by 7.5% and the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation by 10.7%.

Q: What memory configuration does each product use?

A: The MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3 with an 8,192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses system shared memory for all memory specifications.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The MI300X has a TDP of 750 W and a suggested PSU of 1,150 W. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has a TDP of 6 W and lists no PSU recommendation.

Q: Do either of these support graphics APIs?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300X lists N/A for all three.

Q: What is the production status of each product?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is listed as active. The MI300X has no production status listed in the database.

The Verdict

The data indicates two products with no meaningful overlap in purpose or performance. The AMD Instinct MI300X is an accelerator with a 100th percentile ranking, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994, and compute resources measured in tens of thousands of shading units and over 81 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. It sits within 5% of the NVIDIA H200 NVL and 8% of the NVIDIA B200, while leading the L40S and RTX 6000 Ada by 7.5% and 10.7% respectively. This is a part for high-end compute installations requiring maximum throughput, large HBM3 capacity, and PCIe 5.0 connectivity.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is an integrated processor with 192 shading units, 384 GFLOPS of FP32, and a 6 W TDP. It has no recorded benchmarks, placing it at the 50th percentile by default. Its role is limited to portable device graphics output and basic acceleration, as indicated by its system shared memory and Ring Bus interface.

The MI300X should be selected for compute workloads where the 192 GB HBM3 pool, 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, and 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 are required. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile should be selected for low-power integrated graphics in portable systems where 6 W power draw and standard graphics API support are the priorities. The database shows no scenario where the Intel part competes with the MI300X, nor where the MI300X serves the Intel part's display and integration functions.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI300X | Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Xe-LP |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | unknown |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 1000 MHz |

| 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 | 192 |

| TMUs | 1216 | 12 |

| ROPs | 0 | 4 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 4.000 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 12.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 384.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) | 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 6 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2024-12-31 |

| Production Status | null | Active |