AMD Instinct MI308X vs AMD Radeon RX 7700S Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for the AMD Instinct MI308X against the AMD Radeon RX 7700S. The MI308X has no benchmark entries, an average benchmark score of zero, and a percentile rank of 50 among all GPUs. In contrast, the RX 7700S has three recorded benchmark results: 2,185 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 62,983 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 36,380 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average benchmark score across these tests is 33,849, placing it in the 78th percentile of all GPUs.

Without direct comparative numbers, the nearest rivals of the RX 7700S provide context for its performance tier. The AMD Radeon HD 7950 scores 33,951 on average, which is 0.3% above the RX 7700S. The AMD Radeon RX 480 scores 33,997, 0.4% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB scores 33,694, 0.5% below the RX 7700S, and the NVIDIA RTX A5000 scores 33,622, 0.7% lower. These deltas are all within one percentage point, indicating that the RX 7700S sits in a performance band tightly clustered with these older or midrange desktop parts, despite its mobile positioning.

The MI308X, by contrast, has no such comparative data. Its percentile rank of 50 suggests it falls at the midpoint of all recorded GPUs, but with an average benchmark score of zero, this rank likely reflects the absence of tested workloads rather than measured performance. The FP32 compute rating of 81.72 TFLOPS and FP16 rating of 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) indicate a compute-focused part, but these are specification values, not benchmark outcomes. The RX 7700S delivers 20.48 TFLOPS FP32 and 40.96 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), so the MI308X specification sheet suggests roughly four times the FP32 throughput, yet no benchmark confirms this in practice.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs target entirely different segments, and the architecture data reflects that divergence. The MI308X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on CDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The RX 7700S uses the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a 6 nm process. The transistor counts differ by an order of magnitude: the MI308X integrates 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The RX 7700S has 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, with a density of 65.2 million per mm². The MI308X has over 11 times the transistor count and nearly five times the die area.

Memory subsystems diverge sharply. The MI308X carries 192 GB of HBM3 memory across an 8192-bit bus, producing 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. Memory clock is 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective data rate. The RX 7700S has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, with a memory clock of 2250 MHz and 18 Gbps effective. The MI308X provides roughly 18.5 times the bandwidth of the RX 7700S, a massive gap driven by both the wider bus and the faster memory type.

Compute unit counts follow the same pattern. The MI308X has 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs, with a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s and a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s. The RX 7700S has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores, with a pixel rate of 160.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 320.0 GTexel/s. The MI308X has no ROPs and no display outputs, confirming its role as an accelerator with no rasterization or display path. The RX 7700S has full rasterization support and display outputs described as portable device dependent, consistent with a mobile graphics solution.

Clock behavior also differs. The MI308X runs at a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The RX 7700S has a base clock of 1500 MHz, a boost clock of 2500 MHz, and a game clock of 2200 MHz. Despite the RX 7700S having higher clock speeds, the MI308X achieves higher aggregate throughput due to its far larger compute resource pool. The power envelopes reflect this: the MI308X has a TDP of 750 W, while the RX 7700S has a TDP of 100 W, a 7.5 times difference.

Interfaces and form factors separate them further. The MI308X uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus, has an OAM module slot width, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The RX 7700S uses PCIe 4.0 x16, is an IGP form factor, has no power connectors, and no suggested PSU listed. The MI308X supports no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan APIs, while the RX 7700S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI308X has no display outputs; the RX 7700S has outputs that are portable device dependent.

Release dates show the MI308X launched on December 5, 2023, while the RX 7700S launched on January 3, 2023, roughly eleven months earlier. The MI308X predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct, and the RX 7700S predecessor is Polaris Mobile. Production status for the MI308X is unspecified, while the RX 7700S is marked active.

The Verdict

The data shows two parts engineered for fundamentally different workloads, and neither can substitute for the other. The MI308X is a compute accelerator with no rasterization hardware, no display outputs, and no graphics API support. Its 192 GB of HBM3 memory, 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, and 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 throughput point toward large-scale data center compute, such as training or inference workloads, where memory capacity and bandwidth dominate. The absence of ROPs and pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s confirms it cannot render frames. The 750 W TDP and OAM module form factor indicate a server-class installation requiring substantial power delivery and cooling.

The RX 7700S is a mobile graphics processor with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, 20.48 TFLOPS FP32, and full support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. It has 64 ROPs and 32 ray tracing cores, enabling conventional rendering workloads. Its 100 W TDP and IGP form factor suit thin-and-light or mainstream gaming laptops. The benchmark data shows it performs in a narrow band around comparable desktop GPUs from earlier generations, with average scores within one percentage point of the HD 7950, RX 480, GTX 1060 5 GB, and RTX A5000.

For a buyer selecting between these two, the choice is dictated by the task. The MI308X offers no benchmark results in the database, so its measured performance cannot be compared directly. Its specifications indicate a compute-only device with no graphics output, meaning it cannot serve as a display adapter or gaming GPU. The RX 7700S has measurable benchmark scores and a 78th percentile ranking, confirming it operates as a functional graphics solution. The MI308X has a 50th percentile rank, but this is based on no recorded benchmarks and should not be read as equivalent performance.

Pick the MI308X if the workload requires massive memory capacity, extreme bandwidth, and high FP32 throughput in a server environment, with no need for display output. Pick the RX 7700S if the workload involves rendering, gaming, or any graphical output on a portable device, and if measured benchmark performance matters for validation.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X has an FP32 rating of 81.72 TFLOPS, while the AMD Radeon RX 7700S has an FP32 rating of 20.48 TFLOPS. The MI308X specification indicates four times the FP32 throughput.

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: The MI308X uses 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7700S uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the MI308X support display outputs?

A: No. The MI308X has no display outputs and no ROPs, with a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The RX 7700S has display outputs listed as portable device dependent.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The MI308X has a TDP of 750 W and a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The RX 7700S has a TDP of 100 W and no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which GPU has benchmark results in the database?

A: Only the RX 7700S has benchmark scores: 2,185 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 62,983 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 36,380 in Geekbench Vulkan, with an average score of 33,849. The MI308X has no benchmark entries and an average score of zero.

Q: How does the RX 7700S compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 7700S average score of 33,849 is 0.3% below the AMD Radeon HD 7950 (33,951), 0.4% below the AMD Radeon RX 480 (33,997), 0.5% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB (33,694), and 0.7% above the NVIDIA RTX A5000 (33,622).

Where Each One Wins

The MI308X wins on raw compute resources. Its shading unit count of 19,456 is 9.5 times the RX 7700S count of 2,048. Texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s exceeds the RX 7700S rate of 320.0 GTexel/s by a factor of eight. Memory bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s dwarfs the 288.0 GB/s of the RX 7700S. Memory capacity of 192 GB is 24 times the 8 GB of the RX 7700S. The 8192-bit bus width is 64 times the 128-bit bus of the RX 7700S. These advantages suit workloads that load large models or datasets into memory and stream them through compute units without any rasterization step.

The RX 7700S wins on graphics functionality. It has 64 ROPs and a pixel rate of 160.0 GPixel/s, while the MI308X has zero ROPs and zero pixel rate. The RX 7700S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; the MI308X supports none of these APIs. The RX 7700S has 32 ray tracing cores for hardware-accelerated ray tracing. The MI308X has no ray tracing cores listed. The RX 7700S has display outputs, enabling connection to screens, while the MI308X has no outputs at all.

The RX 7700S also wins on measured performance data. Its three benchmark scores place it in the 78th percentile of all GPUs, whereas the MI308X sits at the 50th percentile with no recorded scores. The RX 7700S has a production status of active; the MI308X has no production status listed. The RX 7700S runs at higher clock speeds, with a boost of 2500 MHz versus 2100 MHz for the MI308X, and a base of 1500 MHz versus 1000 MHz.

Power efficiency favors the RX 7700S. At 100 W TDP, it delivers 20.48 TFLOPS FP32, which is 0.2048 TFLOPS per watt. The MI308X at 750 W delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, which is 0.10896 TFLOPS per watt. The RX 7700S has nearly double the FP32 efficiency per watt. However, the MI308X still provides four times the absolute FP32 throughput, which matters for workloads that can use all available compute regardless of power draw.

Process technology differences do not clearly favor either side. The MI308X uses a 5 nm node with a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm², while the RX 7700S uses a 6 nm node with 65.2 million per mm². The smaller node gives the MI308X higher density, but the RX 7700S achieves higher clock speeds. The MI308X die is 1017 mm², the RX 7700S die is 204 mm². These design choices reflect different optimization goals: compute density for the MI308X, mobility and power budget for the RX 7700S.

For use cases, the MI308X fits scenarios requiring large memory footprint and high bandwidth, such as processing large neural networks or scientific simulations, where no display is needed. The RX 7700S fits portable devices that render graphics, play games, or run GPU-accelerated applications through standard graphics APIs, with the ability to connect to a display. The RX 7700S has a predecessor of Polaris Mobile and a release date of January 3, 2023. The MI308X has a predecessor of Radeon Instinct and a release date of December 5, 2023. Both are AMD products, and both come from TSMC foundry, but the architecture split between CDNA 3.0 and RDNA 3.0 dictates separate markets. The MI308X has no successor listed, and the RX 7700S also has no successor listed.