AMD Instinct MI308X vs AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Instinct MI308X and AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT serve entirely different purposes, and the recorded data makes that separation clear. The MI308X is an accelerator built around massive compute throughput and memory capacity, while the RX 7700 XT is a conventional graphics card with display outputs and a full API stack.

The MI308X carries a 50th percentile ranking across all GPUs in the database, with no benchmark records and no rival comparisons available. The RX 7700 XT sits at the 67th percentile, has ten recorded benchmark scores, and an average benchmark score of 22,549. The RX 7700 XT is the only one of the two with any measurable graphics performance data, which means any direct comparison of gaming or rendering capability defaults to the RX 7700 XT by default.

The MI308X targets compute workloads that require 192 GB of HBM3 memory and an 8192-bit memory bus. The RX 7700 XT targets conventional graphics workloads with 12 GB of GDDR6 memory and a 192-bit bus. The MI308X has no display outputs and no graphics API support, so it cannot drive a monitor or run DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan applications. The RX 7700 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it the only option for interactive graphics.

The RX 7700 XT holds a launch MSRP of 449 USD. The MI308X has no recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X has 192 GB of HBM3 memory, while the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory. The MI308X also uses an 8192-bit memory bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, compared to the RX 7700 XT's 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Can the MI308X run games?

A: No. The MI308X has no display outputs and reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support. The RX 7700 XT, by contrast, offers DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support along with 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, and 1x USB Type-C outputs.

Q: Which chip has more shading units?

A: The MI308X has 19,456 shading units, which is substantially more than the RX 7700 XT's 3,456 shading units. The MI308X also has 1,216 texture mapping units, while the RX 7700 XT has 216.

Q: How do the FP32 compute figures compare?

A: The MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the RX 7700 XT delivers 35.17 TFLOPS. Both maintain a 1:1 ratio for FP16 compute, meaning the MI308X reaches 81.72 TFLOPS FP16 and the RX 7700 XT reaches 35.17 TFLOPS FP16.

Q: What is the RX 7700 XT's closest competitor in the database?

A: The nearest rival data for the RX 7700 XT shows the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile at an average score of 22,435, a delta of 0.5% relative to the RX 7700 XT's average of 22,549. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile trails by 0.8%, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 trails by 1.5%.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 7700 XT boosts to 2544 MHz, while the MI308X boosts to 2100 MHz. The RX 7700 XT also has a higher base clock at 1435 MHz versus 1000 MHz for the MI308X.

Architecture Differences

The MI308X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on CDNA 3.0 architecture, part of the Instinct (MIx) generation. The RX 7700 XT uses the Navi 32 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, part of the Navi III (RX 7000) generation. Both are manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the similarities end there.

The MI308X integrates 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The RX 7700 XT integrates 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, yielding a density of 81.2 million per mm². The MI308X packs over five times the transistor count and nearly three times the die area.

The memory subsystems reflect the architectural split. The MI308X uses HBM3 memory with a 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7700 XT uses GDDR6 memory with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI308X has an OAM Module slot width and no power connectors, while the RX 7700 XT is a dual-slot card with two 8-pin power connectors and a 550 W suggested power supply. The MI308X suggests a 1150 W power supply.

The MI308X has no RT cores listed, while the RX 7700 XT includes 54 RT cores and 96 ROPs. The MI308X reports 0 MPixel/s pixel rate, while the RX 7700 XT delivers 244.2 GPixel/s. The MI308X's texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s, far above the RX 7700 XT's 549.5 GTexel/s.

The MI308X has no display outputs and no graphics API support. The RX 7700 XT has three display output types and full API support. The MI308X uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RX 7700 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field recorded in the database.

The MI308X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz, with no game clock listed. The RX 7700 XT has a base clock of 1435 MHz, a boost clock of 2544 MHz, and a game clock of 2171 MHz.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The MI308X has 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth and an effective memory clock of 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The RX 7700 XT has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth and an effective memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Compute resources differ by a wide margin. The MI308X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 TMUs, with no ROPs. The RX 7700 XT has 3,456 shading units, 216 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The MI308X has no RT cores listed; the RX 7700 XT has 54 RT cores.

Power and physical specifications separate the two clearly. The MI308X has a 750 W TDP, an OAM Module slot width, no power connectors, and a suggested 1150 W power supply. The RX 7700 XT has a 245 W TDP, dual-slot width, two 8-pin power connectors, and a suggested 550 W power supply. The RX 7700 XT measures 267 mm in length, 135 mm in height, and 50 mm in width. The MI308X has no recorded dimensions.

Bus interfaces also differ. The MI308X uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RX 7700 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The RX 7700 XT has a production status of Active, while the MI308X has no recorded production status.

Release dates place the RX 7700 XT earlier: September 5, 2023 for the RX 7700 XT versus December 5, 2023 for the MI308X. The RX 7700 XT has a predecessor of Navi II and a successor of Navi IV. The MI308X has a predecessor of Radeon Instinct and no successor listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table between the MI308X and RX 7700 XT is empty, and the winsA and winsB counters are both zero. The MI308X has no benchmark scores recorded, so there are no direct comparisons available.

The RX 7700 XT's benchmark data provides the only performance measurements in this matchup. Its best recorded result is the Geekbench OpenCL score of 138,383. Its Geekbench Vulkan score is 46,443. In PassMark tests, it scores 22,547 for G3D, 12,912 for GPU compute, 1,161 for G2D, 294 for DirectX 9, 232 for DirectX 11, 119 for DirectX 10, and 79 for DirectX 12.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test records a score of 3,316 for the RX 7700 XT. The average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 22,549.

The MI308X's percentile ranking of 50 places it below the RX 7700 XT's 67th percentile, but this comparison is limited by the absence of any benchmark scores for the MI308X. The database has no recorded performance data for the MI308X, so its percentile ranking cannot be interpreted against the RX 7700 XT's actual test results.

For context on the RX 7700 XT's competitive position, its nearest rivals show narrow margins. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile averages 22,435, which is 0.5% below the RX 7700 XT. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile averages 22,729, which is 0.8% above. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 averages 22,895, which is 1.5% above. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 averages 22,170, which is 1.7% below. These deltas indicate the RX 7700 XT sits in a tight performance cluster around the 22,000 to 23,000 average score range.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7700 XT wins in every measured category because it is the only card with recorded benchmark results. It has ten benchmark scores across 3DMark, Geekbench, and PassMark suites. It also wins on graphics functionality, offering DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, plus display outputs covering HDMI 2.1a, DisplayPort 2.1, and USB Type-C. Its 96 ROPs and 244.2 GPixel/s pixel rate enable conventional rasterization workloads that the MI308X cannot perform at all.

The MI308X wins on raw compute capacity and memory scale. Its 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 output is more than double the RX 7700 XT's 35.17 TFLOPS. Its 192 GB of HBM3 memory with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth dwarfs the RX 7700 XT's 12 GB GDDR6 at 432.0 GB/s. Its 2,553.6 GTexel/s texture rate is 4.6 times the RX 7700 XT's 549.5 GTexel/s. Its 19,456 shading units and 1,216 TMUs far exceed the RX 7700 XT's 3,456 and 216, respectively.

The MI308X's PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provides a newer bus generation than the RX 7700 XT's PCIe 4.0 x16. Its OAM Module form factor and lack of power connectors indicate a data center installation environment rather than a consumer desktop slot.

The RX 7700 XT wins on clock speeds, with a 2544 MHz boost clock and 1435 MHz base clock versus the MI308X's 2100 MHz boost and 1000 MHz base. It also wins on power efficiency, with a 245 W TDP versus the MI308X's 750 W TDP, and a 550 W suggested power supply versus 1150 W.

For interactive graphics, desktop rendering, and API-driven workloads, the RX 7700 XT is the only viable choice. For memory-bound compute tasks requiring hundreds of gigabytes of capacity and multi-terabyte memory bandwidth, the MI308X is the one with the necessary specifications. The two cards do not overlap in their intended use cases, and the recorded data reflects that separation completely.