AMD Instinct MI300X vs NVIDIA GB10 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains a single direct comparison between the AMD Instinct MI300X and the NVIDIA GB10: the Geekbench OpenCL test. The AMD Instinct MI300X delivers a score of 317,994, while the NVIDIA GB10 scores 120,137. This represents a decisive 164.7% advantage for the AMD part. In raw terms, the MI300X is more than 2.6 times faster than the GB10 in this workload. The GB10 has no benchmark win in the database; the AMD card wins the only head-to-head test available.

The magnitude of this gap is substantial. A 164.7% delta means the MI300X is not merely faster, it operates in a different performance class. The GB10's score of 120,137 places it near the 95th percentile of all GPUs, but the MI300X achieves a perfect 100th percentile ranking. In the context of the nearest rivals, the NVIDIA GB10 is within 3% of the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB, which scores 114,395, and 2.6% ahead of that same part. It also trails the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 by 1.3%, which scores 118,976. This positions the GB10 as a competent mid-tier server chip, but the MI300X sits far above it.

Looking at the nearest rivals for the MI300X, the data shows it is 5% behind the NVIDIA H200 NVL, which scores 334,891, and 8% behind the NVIDIA B200, which scores 345,482. However, it is 7.5% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S, which scores 295,763, and 10.7% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation, which scores 287,237. The MI300X's closest competitor in the database is the H200 NVL, and the difference between them is relatively small compared to the chasm between the MI300X and the GB10. The GB10's nearest rival, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, scores 117,088, a mere 0.3% behind the GB10. This illustrates that the GB10 is firmly in the range of compact workstation-class parts, while the MI300X is competing with the top-tier data center accelerators.

The average benchmark score for the MI300X is 317,994, which is identical to its single Geekbench OpenCL result. The GB10 has an average of 117,393, derived from its two recorded tests: 120,137 in OpenCL and 114,648 in Vulkan. The Vulkan score is lower than the OpenCL score by 4.8%, indicating some variation between API workloads. The MI300X has no Vulkan result recorded, so cross-API behavior cannot be compared directly. Still, the OpenCL gap alone is enough to establish a clear performance hierarchy.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X scores 317,994, which is 164.7% higher than the NVIDIA GB10's score of 120,137.

Q: How does the NVIDIA GB10 compare to its nearest rival, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation?

A: The GB10 scores 120,137 in OpenCL and 114,648 in Vulkan, with an average of 117,393. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation averages 117,088, which is only 0.3% behind the GB10.

Q: What is the AMD Instinct MI300X's percentile ranking?

A: The MI300X ranks in the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the GB10 ranks in the 95th percentile.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X has a memory bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s, while the NVIDIA GB10 has a bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 performance?

A: The MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the GB10 delivers 29.71 TFLOPS. The MI300X is 2.75 times higher in this metric.

Q: Which GPU has a larger memory capacity?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3 memory, while the NVIDIA GB10 has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Instinct MI300X is the faster GPU in every recorded metric. Its single OpenCL benchmark score of 317,994 crushes the GB10's 120,137. The MI300X also holds the top percentile slot at 100, while the GB10 sits at 95. For any workload measured by the database, the MI300X is the clear choice in terms of raw performance.

The NVIDIA GB10, however, is not without merit. Its average score of 117,393 places it within striking distance of the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, and it slightly edges out the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB. The GB10 also supports a Vulkan path, with a score of 114,648, which the MI300X lacks entirely. For users who need Vulkan acceleration, the GB10 is the only option in this pairing that has recorded data.

The verdict depends heavily on use case. If the priority is absolute compute throughput, the MI300X wins outright. If the priority is a compact, lower-power part with a display output and Vulkan support, the GB10 is the only one that fits. The MI300X has no display outputs and a TDP of 750 W, while the GB10 has a TDP of 140 W and includes 1x HDMI. The MI300X also has no launch MSRP recorded, while the GB10 has a launch MSRP of 3,999 USD. In terms of raw benchmark results, there is no contest: the MI300X wins the only head-to-head test by a 164.7% margin.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ substantially across nearly every specification field. The AMD Instinct MI300X uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 1017 mm² and 153,000 million transistors. The NVIDIA GB10 also uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, but its die size is 382 mm² and its transistor count is unknown. The MI300X has a transistor density of 150.4M per mm², while the GB10 has no density figure recorded.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The MI300X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz, with memory clocked at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The GB10 has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost clock of 2418 MHz, with memory at 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective). The GB10 runs at a higher clock frequency, but the MI300X compensates with far more compute units.

Memory configurations are radically different. The MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The GB10 has 128 GB of LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The MI300X's memory bandwidth is 19.5 times higher than the GB10's.

The shading unit count is 19,456 for the MI300X versus 6,144 for the GB10. TMUs number 1,216 for the AMD part and 384 for the NVIDIA part. ROPs are 0 for the MI300X and 48 for the GB10. The GB10 has 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores, while the MI300X has no recorded RT or tensor core counts. Pixel rate for the GB10 is 116.1 GPixel/s, while the MI300X is recorded at 0 MPixel/s. Texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s for the MI300X versus 928.5 GTexel/s for the GB10. FP32 and FP16 performance are both 81.72 TFLOPS for the MI300X, and both 29.71 TFLOPS for the GB10.

Power and physical specifications also diverge. The MI300X has a TDP of 750 W and a suggested PSU of 1150 W, while the GB10 has a TDP of 140 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W. The MI300X is an OAM Module with no power connectors, and the GB10 is an IGP with no power connectors. The MI300X has no display outputs, while the GB10 has 1x HDMI. The GB10 has dimensions of 150 mm by 51 mm by 150 mm, while the MI300X has no dimensions recorded. The MI300X's bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16, and the GB10 also uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is fundamental. The AMD Instinct MI300X is built on CDNA 3.0 architecture, with the chip codename Aqua Vanjaram. It belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation. The NVIDIA GB10 uses Blackwell 2.0 architecture, with the chip codename GB20B, and belongs to the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation.

The MI300X is specifically designed for compute acceleration, evidenced by its lack of display outputs, zero ROPs, and no RT cores. Its massive 8192-bit memory bus and HBM3 memory point to a focus on memory-bound workloads. The GB10, in contrast, includes RT cores and tensor cores, has a display output, and uses LPDDR5X memory. This suggests a more general-purpose server role, possibly including inference and rendering tasks.

The MI300X has a transistor count of 153,000 million on a 1017 mm² die, reflecting a dense compute-oriented design. The GB10 has a smaller 382 mm² die with an unknown transistor count. The MI300X's predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct, while the GB10's predecessor is Server Hopper. The GB10 has a successor listed as Server Rubin, while the MI300X has no successor recorded. The GB10 is marked as Active production status, while the MI300X has no production status field.

The API support is identical: both have DirectX N/A, OpenGL N/A, and Vulkan N/A. However, the GB10 has an actual Vulkan benchmark score, while the MI300X does not. The GB10 has a release date of October 14, 2025, while the MI300X was released on December 5, 2023. The GB10 has a launch MSRP of 3,999 USD; the MI300X has no MSRP recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300X wins in every recorded compute benchmark. Its OpenCL score of 317,994 is 164.7% higher than the GB10's 120,137. It also wins on raw hardware specifications: more shading units (19,456 versus 6,144), more TMUs (1,216 versus 384), higher FP32 (81.72 TFLOPS versus 29.71 TFLOPS), higher FP16 (81.72 TFLOPS versus 29.71 TFLOPS), more memory (192 GB versus 128 GB), and vastly higher bandwidth (5.32 TB/s versus 273.2 GB/s). For any workload that relies on massive parallel compute and memory throughput, the MI300X is the clear winner.

The NVIDIA GB10 wins on specific practical fronts. It has a Vulkan benchmark score of 114,648, which is absent for the MI300X. It also has a display output (1x HDMI), while the MI300X has none. The GB10 has a much lower TDP of 140 W versus 750 W, and a lower suggested PSU of 300 W versus 1150 W. Its physical dimensions are recorded at 150 mm by 51 mm by 150 mm, making it a compact IGP form factor. The GB10 also has a higher boost clock of 2418 MHz versus 2100 MHz for the MI300X, and a higher base clock of 1665 MHz versus 1000 MHz.

In terms of percentile ranking, the MI300X is at the 100th percentile, while the GB10 is at the 95th. The GB10's nearest rival, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, is only 0.3% slower, meaning the GB10 is competitive within its class. The MI300X, however, is 5% behind the H200 NVL and 8% behind the B200, indicating it is near the top but not the absolute fastest in the database. Still, against the GB10 specifically, the MI300X holds a dominant 164.7% lead. The data shows that the MI300X is designed for peak compute density, while the GB10 is built for versatility and efficiency in a smaller package.