AMD Instinct MI300X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB Comparison

AMD Instinct MI300X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB occupy opposite extremes of the GPU market. The MI300X is a data center compute accelerator with a 192 GB HBM3 frame buffer, while the RTX 3050 6 GB is an entry-level desktop graphics card with 6 GB of GDDR6. Their recorded benchmark results reflect this divide: the MI300X posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994, placing it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The RTX 3050 6 GB averages 2,329 across its benchmark suite, sitting in the 15th percentile. The comparison is not competitive in any traditional sense, but the data clarifies how each product is engineered for entirely different workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Instinct MI300X and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB. Instead, the available data consists of each card’s individual benchmark scores and their nearest rival comparisons. The MI300X’s single recorded benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, yields a score of 317,994. That result places it at the 100th percentile among all GPUs tracked, meaning no recorded card scores higher. The RTX 3050 6 GB’s highest individual score is 10,738 in Passmark G3D, while its lowest is 53 in Passmark DirectX 12.

The nearest rival data provides the clearest relative positioning. The MI300X trails the NVIDIA H200 NVL by 5% (the H200 NVL averages 334,891), and it trails the NVIDIA B200 by 8% (the B200 averages 345,482). Conversely, the MI300X leads the NVIDIA L40S by 7.5% (the L40S averages 295,763) and leads the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation by 10.7% (the RTX 6000 Ada averages 287,237). These deltas show the MI300X sitting in the upper tier of data center accelerators, competitive with but not dominant over the fastest NVIDIA compute parts.

The RTX 3050 6 GB’s nearest rivals are far less powerful. Its average score of 2,329 is 0.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M (average 2,335) and 0.4% behind the NVIDIA Quadro P620 (average 2,339). It leads the Intel HD Graphics 510 by 1% (average 2,305) and trails the NVIDIA GeForce GT 550M by 1.4% (average 2,363). These are narrow margins against hardware from a much older generation, confirming that the RTX 3050 6 GB sits near the bottom of the current performance distribution.

Raw capability differences reinforce the benchmark gap. The MI300X computes 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32, compared to 6.774 TFLOPS for the RTX 3050 6 GB. Texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 105.8 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth is 5.32 TB/s versus 168.0 GB/s. None of these are direct benchmark scores, but they explain why the percentile gap is so wide.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300X wins in every compute-intensive category where the database records data. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994 is the only benchmark in its record, and that score alone places it above all other GPUs in the database. The nearest rival comparisons show it ahead of the NVIDIA L40S by 7.5% and ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation by 10.7%. The MI300X also leads in raw processing resources: 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. Its 192 GB of HBM3 memory at 5.32 TB/s bandwidth is intended for large model residency, far beyond what any desktop card can address.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB wins in the categories of desktop usability and API support. It is the only card of the two with display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a). It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI300X lists N/A for all three APIs. The RTX 3050 6 GB also has dedicated ray tracing cores (18) and tensor cores (72), features absent from the MI300X’s specification. Its pixel rate is 47.04 GPixel/s, whereas the MI300X records 0 MPixel/s, confirming the latter has no rasterization output stage.

The RTX 3050 6 GB also wins decisively on power draw. Its TDP is 70 W with a suggested power supply of 250 W, while the MI300X draws 750 W and requires a suggested 1150 W PSU. The RTX 3050 6 GB is a dual-slot card measuring 242 mm in length and 112 mm in height. The MI300X is an OAM module with no display outputs and no power connectors on the card itself.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark percentile?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X is in the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB is in the 15th percentile.

Q: What is the MI300X’s nearest rival according to average benchmark score?

A: The nearest rival is the NVIDIA H200 NVL, which averages 334,891, 5% higher than the MI300X’s 317,994. The MI300X is ahead of the NVIDIA L40S by 7.5% and ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation by 10.7%.

Q: How does the RTX 3050 6 GB compare to its nearest rivals?

A: Its average score of 2,329 is 0.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M, 0.4% behind the NVIDIA Quadro P620, 1.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 550M, and 1% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics 510.

Q: Does the MI300X support DirectX?

A: No. The database lists DirectX as N/A for the MI300X. The RTX 3050 6 GB supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What memory configurations do the two cards use?

A: The MI300X uses 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 3050 6 GB uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 168.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has display outputs?

A: Only the RTX 3050 6 GB has display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The MI300X records no outputs.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every recorded specification. The MI300X is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die. The RTX 3050 6 GB uses an 8 nm process at Samsung with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. Transistor density is 150.4M per mm² for the MI300X versus 43.5M per mm² for the RTX 3050 6 GB.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The MI300X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz, with memory at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The RTX 3050 6 GB has a base clock of 1042 MHz and a boost clock of 1470 MHz, with memory at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). Despite the higher boost on the MI300X, the RTX 3050 6 GB starts from a slightly higher base clock.

Memory capacity, type, bus width, and bandwidth all differ. The MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 3050 6 GB has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 168.0 GB/s bandwidth. Processing units also diverge: the MI300X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 TMUs with no ROPs, while the RTX 3050 6 GB has 2,304 shading units, 72 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RTX 3050 6 GB adds 18 ray tracing cores and 72 tensor cores; the MI300X lists none.

Power and physical specifications are equally divergent. The MI300X has a 750 W TDP with a suggested 1150 W PSU and uses an OAM Module slot. The RTX 3050 6 GB has a 70 W TDP with a suggested 250 W PSU, uses a dual-slot design, and measures 242 mm by 112 mm. The MI300X uses PCIe 5.0 x16; the RTX 3050 6 GB uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The MI300X has no display outputs; the RTX 3050 6 GB has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The RTX 3050 6 GB has a launch MSRP of 179 USD; no launch MSRP is recorded for the MI300X.

Architecture Differences

The MI300X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, designed for compute acceleration. The RTX 3050 6 GB uses the Ampere architecture on the GA107 chip, designed for consumer graphics. The MI300X belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation, while the RTX 3050 6 GB is part of the GeForce 30 series. The MI300X’s predecessor is Radeon Instinct; the RTX 3050 6 GB’s predecessor is GeForce 20 and its successor is GeForce 40.

The process nodes and foundries differ. The MI300X is fabricated at TSMC on 5 nm, while the RTX 3050 6 GB is fabricated at Samsung on 8 nm. The MI300X has no raster output stage, recording 0 MPixel/s pixel rate, which aligns with its lack of display outputs and N/A API support. The RTX 3050 6 GB has a pixel rate of 47.04 GPixel/s and full API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Feature sets reflect their target markets. The MI300X carries 192 GB of HBM3 memory and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, aimed at large-scale compute workloads. The RTX 3050 6 GB includes ray tracing and tensor cores for real-time graphics and AI acceleration in a desktop context. The MI300X has no power connectors on the card, drawing power through the OAM module interface. The RTX 3050 6 GB also has no power connectors, relying on the PCIe slot, but its suggested PSU is 250 W versus 1150 W for the MI300X.

The production status also differs: the RTX 3050 6 GB is marked end-of-life, while the MI300X has no recorded production status. The MI300X was released on 2023-12-05, and the RTX 3050 6 GB on 2024-02-01. These release dates place the MI300X earlier in the database’s timeline, but its performance class remains far above the RTX 3050 6 GB.