AMD Instinct MI308X vs AMD Radeon RX 7400 Comparison

AMD Instinct MI308X and AMD Radeon RX 7400 occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum. The MI308X is a massive compute accelerator built for servers, while the RX 7400 is a compact, low-power graphics card for desktops. The database records no shared benchmark results between the two, so a direct performance comparison relies on architectural and specification analysis. The recorded data shows the MI308X holds a decisive advantage in raw compute throughput, while the RX 7400 offers features like ray tracing and display outputs that the accelerator lacks entirely.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No head-to-head benchmark results exist in the database for these two products. The AMD Instinct MI308X has no recorded benchmark entries, with an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile ranking of 50 among all GPUs. The AMD Radeon RX 7400, by contrast, has eight recorded benchmark scores across various tests.

The RX 7400’s strongest recorded result is in Passmark G3D, where it scores 11,897 points. Its Passmark G2D score is 1,209. In compute-oriented tests, the RX 7400 delivers 5,152 points in Passmark GPU Compute. DirectX performance varies widely: Passmark DirectX 9 scores 176, DirectX 11 scores 97, DirectX 10 scores 59, and DirectX 12 scores 44. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test records a score of 1,103.

Because the MI308X has no benchmark scores, the database cannot establish a direct numerical comparison. The wins column shows zero wins for each product. The MI308X’s percentile ranking of 50 is higher than the RX 7400’s ranking of 17, indicating the accelerator sits near the middle of the database’s GPU distribution despite lacking recorded tests, while the RX 7400 sits in the lower quartile.

The RX 7400’s nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon 8040S with an average score of 2,440 and a delta of 1.1 percent, the NVIDIA GeForce 710M at 2,433 points with a 1.4 percent delta, the Intel HD Graphics 610 at 2,425 points with a 1.8 percent delta, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M at 2,422 points with a 1.9 percent delta. These deltas show the RX 7400’s average score of 2,467 edges out these competitors by narrow margins, confirming its position as a low-tier performer.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI308X wins in every category of raw compute capability. Its FP32 throughput is 81.72 TFLOPS, and its FP16 throughput matches at 81.72 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The texture rate reaches 2,553.6 GTexel/s. The pixel rate is recorded as 0 MPixel/s, reflecting its lack of display outputs. The accelerator carries 19,456 shading units and 1,216 texture mapping units. Memory capacity is 192 GB of HBM3 across an 8,192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth.

The AMD Radeon RX 7400 wins in areas related to consumer graphics functionality. It has 64 raster operation units, producing a pixel rate of 147.2 GPixel/s. It includes 28 ray tracing cores, a feature completely absent from the MI308X. The RX 7400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI308X reports N/A for all three API categories. The RX 7400 also provides display outputs with 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1, while the MI308X has no outputs.

Power efficiency is another clear win for the RX 7400. Its thermal design power is 43 W with a suggested power supply of 200 W. The MI308X draws 750 W and requires a suggested power supply of 1,150 W. The RX 7400 uses a single 6-pin power connector, while the MI308X has no power connectors listed due to its OAM module form factor.

The Verdict

The data indicates these products serve entirely different purposes with no overlap in target use cases. The AMD Instinct MI308X is a compute accelerator built for workloads that demand massive memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 192 GB of HBM3 memory and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth support large datasets that far exceed the RX 7400’s 8 GB GDDR6 allocation. The FP32 throughput of 81.72 TFLOPS positions it as a high-end compute solution, despite the absence of recorded benchmark scores.

The AMD Radeon RX 7400 is a consumer graphics card for conventional display-based computing. Its 16.49 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is substantial for its power envelope, but the recorded benchmark scores place it in the lower tier of the database. The average benchmark score of 2,467 and the narrow margins over its nearest rivals confirm its entry-level positioning. The RX 7400’s support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, ray tracing cores, and display outputs makes it functional for gaming and desktop use.

Users requiring compute acceleration for large-scale data processing should consider the MI308X. Users needing a display-capable graphics card with modern API support should consider the RX 7400. The two products do not compete in any measurable way, and the database lacks the comparative data to rank one above the other in shared workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Radeon RX 7400 delivers 16.49 TFLOPS, a difference of roughly 5x in favor of the MI308X.

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI308X support DirectX?

A: No. The database records DirectX support as N/A for the MI308X. The RX 7400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The MI308X has 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8,192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The RX 7400 has a pixel rate of 147.2 GPixel/s. The MI308X has a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, consistent with its lack of display outputs.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The MI308X has a TDP of 750 W and a suggested power supply of 1,150 W. The RX 7400 has a TDP of 43 W and a suggested power supply of 200 W.

Q: Which GPU includes ray tracing cores?

A: The RX 7400 includes 28 ray tracing cores. The MI308X lists no ray tracing cores in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI308X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on CDNA 3.0 architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It contains 153,000 million transistors on a die size of 1,017 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 150.4 million per square millimeter. The architecture targets compute acceleration with no display pipeline, which explains the absence of ROPs and display outputs.

The AMD Radeon RX 7400 uses the Navi 33 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. It is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC, containing 13,300 million transistors on a die size of 204 mm², giving a transistor density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. The RDNA 3.0 architecture includes ray tracing support and a full graphics pipeline with ROPs and display outputs.

The MI308X belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation under the Radeon Instinct predecessor. The RX 7400 belongs to the Radeon RX 7000 series, generation Navi III, with a predecessor of Navi II and a successor of Navi IV. The MI308X released on December 5, 2023, while the RX 7400 released on August 7, 2025. The MI308X uses an OAM Module slot width, while the RX 7400 uses a Dual-slot design.

Specification Differences

The process node differs: 5 nm for the MI308X versus 6 nm for the RX 7400. Transistor counts differ substantially at 153,000 million versus 13,300 million, and die size differs at 1,017 mm² versus 204 mm². Transistor density measures 150.4 million per square millimeter for the MI308X and 65.2 million for the RX 7400.

Clock speeds differ in configuration. The MI308X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz, with no game clock listed. The RX 7400 has a base clock of 1452 MHz, a boost clock of 2300 MHz, and a game clock of 2200 MHz. Memory clocks show 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective for the MI308X and 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective for the RX 7400.

Memory specifications diverge completely. The MI308X uses 192 GB of HBM3 with an 8,192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7400 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units count 19,456 for the MI308X versus 1,792 for the RX 7400. Texture mapping units number 1,216 versus 112. The MI308X has 0 ROPs, while the RX 7400 has 64. Ray tracing cores appear only on the RX 7400 with 28 units.

Texture rate measures 2,553.6 GTexel/s for the MI308X and 257.6 GTexel/s for the RX 7400. FP16 throughput shows 81.72 TFLOPS for the MI308X and 32.97 TFLOPS for the RX 7400, with ratios of 1:1 and 2:1 respectively. Power consumption differs at 750 W versus 43 W. The suggested power supply is 1,150 W versus 200 W. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 for the MI308X and PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RX 7400. Display outputs exist only on the RX 7400 with 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The MI308X lists no power connectors, while the RX 7400 uses 1x 6-pin.