AMD Instinct MI308X vs AMD Radeon 780M Comparison

AMD Instinct MI308X and AMD Radeon 780M occupy opposite ends of the hardware spectrum, yet both are AMD products with distinct architectures and purposes. The MI308X is a CDNA 3.0 accelerator built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, using the massive Aqua Vanjaram chip. The 780M is an RDNA 3.0 integrated processor on a 4 nm node, built around the Phoenix chip. The database shows no overlapping benchmark scores between the two, and the head-to-head comparison table is empty. The MI308X has no recorded benchmarks, no average score, and no nearest rivals, while the 780M has three recorded tests and a clear competitive position. This analysis relies entirely on the recorded data, which means the MI308X can only be evaluated through its architectural specifications, not through measured performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no shared benchmark tests between the AMD Instinct MI308X and the AMD Radeon 780M. The MI308X has an empty benchmarks array, an average benchmark score of zero, and a percentile ranking of 50 among all GPUs. The 780M, in contrast, has three benchmark entries: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 480, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 18602, and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 33683. Its average benchmark score is 17588, with a percentile ranking of 61.

Because the MI308X has no measured scores, direct numerical comparison across identical workloads is impossible from the database. The 780M does have a clear competitive context. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro 560, has an average score of 17551, which places the 780M 0.2% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 averages 17639, putting the 780M 0.3% behind. The AMD Radeon HD 7790 scores 17666, making the 780M 0.4% behind that card as well. The AMD Radeon Pro 460 averages 17509, with the 780M 0.5% ahead.

The MI308X, by contrast, has no nearest rivals listed and no average score to anchor it in the competitive field. Its percentile ranking of 50 is lower than the 780M's 61, which suggests that whatever data exists for the MI308X places it in the middle of the database distribution, though without benchmark values the interpretation is limited. The 780M's Geekbench Vulkan score of 33683 is notably higher than its OpenCL score of 18602, indicating stronger performance under the Vulkan API in the recorded tests.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 480 for the 780M is the only DirectX-oriented measurement available. The MI308X lists DirectX as N/A, along with OpenGL and Vulkan, so no API-specific performance can be attributed to it. The data shows a one-sided benchmark presence: the 780M has measurable results, the MI308X has none.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the AMD Radeon 780M is the only one of the two with verified performance metrics. It holds a 61st percentile ranking among all GPUs and an average score of 17588. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly around that figure, with deltas of only 0.2% to 0.5%, meaning the 780M sits in a dense performance band where small score differences separate cards. The MI308X has no benchmark scores, no average, and no rivals in the database, so any performance judgment would require external data.

The architectural records point to different design goals. The MI308X uses 19456 shading units, 1216 texture mapping units, and 0 render output units, with a 8192 bit memory bus and 192 GB of HBM3 memory. The 780M uses 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with 12 ray tracing cores and system shared memory. These are not competing products in any measured sense. The MI308X targets compute density, the 780M targets integrated graphics within a processor.

The data indicates that the 780M is a functional, benchmarked graphics solution, while the MI308X is a specialized accelerator with no recorded graphics benchmarks. Users seeking a card with confirmed scores and competitive positioning would look at the 780M. Users needing massive memory capacity and compute resources would consider the MI308X, but the database provides no measured evidence of its performance.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 780M wins in every measurable category available in the database. It has benchmark scores in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, Geekbench OpenCL, and Geekbench Vulkan. It has a defined percentile rank of 61, an average score of 17588, and a set of four nearest rivals with small deltas. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which means it can run modern graphics APIs. Its pixel rate is 92.80 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 139.2 GTexel/s.

The AMD Instinct MI308X wins in raw specification scale. It has 192 GB of HBM3 memory, a 8192 bit bus, 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth, 19456 shading units, and 1216 TMUs. Its FP32 and FP16 compute are both 81.72 TFLOPS, which is drastically higher than the 780M's 8.909 TFLOPS in both. The MI308X also has a 1017 mm² die and 153000 million transistors, versus the 780M's 178 mm² die and 25390 million transistors. The MI308X is built on a 5 nm process, the 780M on 4 nm.

The MI308X wins on memory bandwidth by a wide margin: 5.32 TB/s versus system dependent bandwidth for the 780M. It also has a higher base clock of 1000 MHz versus 800 MHz, though the 780M has a higher boost clock of 2900 MHz versus 2100 MHz. The MI308X uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the 780M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The MI308X has no display outputs, while the 780M's outputs are motherboard dependent.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M has an average benchmark score of 17588. The AMD Instinct MI308X has an average benchmark score of 0, with no recorded benchmarks.

Q: How does the Radeon 780M compare to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060?

A: The RTX 4060 has an average score of 17639, and the 780M is 0.3% behind that score.

Q: What is the memory configuration of the Instinct MI308X?

A: The MI308X has 192 GB of HBM3 memory, an 8192 bit bus width, and 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Does the Instinct MI308X support DirectX?

A: The MI308X lists DirectX as N/A, along with OpenGL and Vulkan. The Radeon 780M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the Radeon 780M's percentile ranking?

A: The Radeon 780M has a percentile ranking of 61 among all GPUs. The Instinct MI308X has a percentile ranking of 50.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Instinct MI308X has 19456 shading units. The Radeon 780M has 768 shading units.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI308X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture and the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The AMD Radeon 780M uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture and the Phoenix chip. Both are fabricated by TSMC, but on different nodes: the MI308X uses 5 nm, the 780M uses 4 nm. The MI308X has 153000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The 780M has 25390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, with a density of 142.6 million per mm².

The MI308X belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation and has the predecessor Radeon Instinct. The 780M belongs to the Navi III IGP (Phoenix) generation, with the predecessor Navi II IGP and the successor Navi III IGP. The MI308X has no recorded successor. The MI308X has no display outputs and no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan. The 780M has motherboard dependent display outputs and full API support including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The MI308X has 12 ray tracing cores listed as null, while the 780M has 12 ray tracing cores explicitly. The MI308X has 0 ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, while the 780M has 32 ROPs and a pixel rate of 92.80 GPixel/s. The MI308X has a texture rate of 2553.6 GTexel/s, versus 139.2 GTexel/s for the 780M. The MI308X uses an OAM Module slot width, the 780M uses an IGP slot width.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications differ across nearly every field. The process node differs: 5 nm for the MI308X, 4 nm for the 780M. Transistor count differs: 153000 million versus 25390 million. Die size differs: 1017 mm² versus 178 mm². Transistor density differs: 150.4 million per mm² versus 142.6 million per mm².

Clock speeds differ. The MI308X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The 780M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. Memory differs substantially: the MI308X has 192 GB of HBM3 with an 8192 bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, while the 780M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Compute resources differ. The MI308X has 19456 shading units and 1216 TMUs, with 0 ROPs. The 780M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. FP32 and FP16 compute are 81.72 TFLOPS for the MI308X and 8.909 TFLOPS for the 780M. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for the MI308X and 92.80 GPixel/s for the 780M. Texture rate is 2553.6 GTexel/s versus 139.2 GTexel/s.

Power and interface differ. The MI308X has a TDP of 750 W and a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The 780M has a TDP of 15 W and no suggested PSU. The MI308X uses PCIe 5.0 x16, the 780M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The MI308X has no display outputs, the 780M has motherboard dependent outputs. The bus interface and slot width also differ: OAM Module versus IGP. The MI308X has no power connectors listed as None, and the 780M also lists None for power connectors. The MI308X has no production status recorded, while the 780M is Active. Release dates differ: the MI308X was released on 2023-12-05, the 780M on 2024-01-30.