AMD Instinct MI300X vs NVIDIA Jetson T4000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data offers only one direct benchmark score, and it belongs to the AMD Instinct MI300X. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the MI300X produces a score of 317,994, placing it at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 has no recorded benchmark scores, leaving its average benchmark score at zero and its percentile at 50. This means no direct head-to-head comparison can be drawn from the measurements.

For context, the MI300X's score positions it above the NVIDIA L40S, which averages 295,763, a 7.5% deficit relative to the MI300X. It also sits above the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation, which averages 287,237, a 10.7% difference. The MI300X trails the NVIDIA H200 NVL and NVIDIA B200, which score 334,891 and 345,482 respectively, representing 5% and 8% advantages over the MI300X. Since the Jetson T4000 lacks any benchmark entries, the database records zero wins for each product in head-to-head comparisons.

FAQ

Q: What is the single benchmark score recorded for the AMD Instinct MI300X?

A: The MI300X records a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994, which places it at the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Jetson T4000 have any benchmark scores?

A: No. The Jetson T4000 has an empty benchmark list, an average benchmark score of zero, and a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs.

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

A: The NVIDIA H200 NVL averages 334,891, which is 5% higher than the MI300X's score of 317,994.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two products?

A: The MI300X uses 192 GB of HBM3 memory with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The Jetson T4000 uses 64 GB of LPDDR5X memory with a 256-bit bus and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings for both products?

A: The MI300X is rated at 750 W, while the Jetson T4000 is rated at 90 W.

Q: What is the release date for each product?

A: The MI300X was released on 2023-12-05, and the Jetson T4000 was released on 2026-01-04.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI300X is built on the CDNA 3.0 architecture using the Aqua Vanjaram chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It contains 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The Jetson T4000 uses NVIDIA's Blackwell architecture with the GB10B chip, also on a 5 nm TSMC process, but its transistor count is listed as unknown and its die size is 391 mm².

The MI300X is a massive compute accelerator with 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and no ROPs, pixel rate, or ray tracing cores. It has no tensor cores listed. The Jetson T4000 is a compact integrated GPU with 1,536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. It includes 12 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the MI300X's specification sheet. The MI300X delivers a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, while the Jetson T4000 manages 73.44 GTexel/s and 24.48 GPixel/s.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The MI300X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The Jetson T4000 operates at a fixed 1530 MHz for both base and boost. Memory clocks also diverge: the MI300X runs at 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective, while the Jetson T4000 runs at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective.

Specification Differences

The MI300X and Jetson T4000 differ across nearly every measurable specification. The MI300X uses an OAM Module slot width, the Jetson T4000 uses an IGP form factor. Both have no power connectors and no display outputs, but the MI300X requires a suggested PSU of 1150 W, while the Jetson T4000 needs only 250 W. The MI300X connects via PCIe 5.0 x16, the Jetson T4000 via PCIe 5.0 x8.

Floating-point performance shows a wide gap. The MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16, with a 1:1 ratio. The Jetson T4000 delivers 4.700 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16, also at 1:1. This makes the MI300X roughly 17 times faster in raw FP32 throughput, based on the recorded figures.

Physical dimensions are only provided for the Jetson T4000: 87 mm length, 100 mm height, and 15 mm width. The MI300X has no recorded dimensions. The Jetson T4000 is listed as active in production status, while the MI300X has no production status recorded. The MI300X's predecessor is Radeon Instinct, and the Jetson T4000's predecessor is Server Hopper. The Jetson T4000 has a successor listed as Server Rubin, while the MI300X has none. The Jetson T4000 has a launch MSRP of 1,999 USD, which is stated once here as recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300X wins on raw compute output. Its FP32 and FP16 figures of 81.72 TFLOPS dwarf the Jetson T4000's 4.700 TFLOPS. The MI300X also wins on memory capacity, bandwidth, and bus width: 192 GB versus 64 GB, 5.32 TB/s versus 273.2 GB/s, and 8192-bit versus 256-bit. It has more shading units, more texture mapping units, and a higher texture fill rate. Its benchmark score of 317,994 confirms its position at the top of the database's GPU ranking.

The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 wins on efficiency and form factor. Its 90 W TDP is dramatically lower than the MI300X's 750 W, and its suggested PSU of 250 W is far below the MI300X's 1150 W. The Jetson T4000 is a compact IGP with recorded dimensions of 87 mm by 100 mm by 15 mm, whereas the MI300X is an OAM module with no dimensions listed. The Jetson T4000 includes ray tracing cores and tensor cores, which the MI300X does not list. It also has a higher fixed clock of 1530 MHz compared to the MI300X's 1000 MHz base, and its memory runs at a higher effective speed of 8.5 Gbps versus 5.2 Gbps.

The Jetson T4000 has a later release date of 2026-01-04, and it is marked as active in production. The MI300X released on 2023-12-05. The Jetson T4000 also has a successor planned, the Server Rubin, while the MI300X does not.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the AMD Instinct MI300X is the dominant compute platform. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994 places it at the 100th percentile, and it outperforms several NVIDIA rivals in the database, including the L40S and RTX 6000 Ada Generation. Its 192 GB of HBM3 memory with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth and 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput make it suitable for workloads demanding maximum memory capacity and compute density. The absence of display outputs and the 750 W TDP indicate a data-center-oriented accelerator.

The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 occupies a different role. With no benchmark scores recorded, its performance cannot be verified against the MI300X. Its strengths are power efficiency, compact size, and integrated features. The 90 W TDP and 250 W suggested PSU make it feasible for constrained environments. The inclusion of ray tracing cores and tensor cores suggests support for graphics and AI acceleration tasks that the MI300X does not advertise. Its 64 GB of LPDDR5X memory and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth are modest compared to the MI300X, but the fixed 1530 MHz clock and 8.5 Gbps effective memory speed show a design tuned for consistent operation.

The data indicates two products with opposite priorities. The MI300X maximizes absolute compute and memory resources. The Jetson T4000 minimizes power and physical footprint while adding specialized cores. Users who need the highest recorded compute scores and memory bandwidth should select the MI300X. Users who require a low-power, compact module with ray tracing and tensor capabilities should select the Jetson T4000. No direct benchmark comparison exists, so the choice rests on the specification differences and the MI300X's sole recorded score.