AMD Instinct MI308X vs Intel Arc B770 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural generations of the AMD Instinct MI308X and Intel Arc B770?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, belonging to the Instinct (MIx) generation. The Intel Arc B770 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture on the BMG-G31 chip, belonging to the Battlemage (Arc 7) generation.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ between the two cards?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X packs 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc B770 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc B770 has a boost clock of 2400 MHz, while the AMD Instinct MI308X boosts to 2100 MHz. However, the AMD card has a base clock of 1000 MHz compared to the Intel card’s 2100 MHz base.

Q: What are the FP32 performance figures for each GPU?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The Intel Arc B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS FP32, which is roughly one quarter of the AMD part’s throughput.

Q: What display outputs does each card provide?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X has no display outputs. The Intel Arc B770 provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Q: What is the power draw requirement for each card?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X has a TDP of 750 W and requires a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The Intel Arc B770 has a TDP of 225 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI308X is built for compute density. Its 19456 shading units, 1216 TMUs, and 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 throughput place it in an entirely different performance class for raw number crunching. The card’s 192 GB HBM3 pool with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth makes it suitable for massive datasets that exceed the memory capacity of conventional graphics cards. With no display outputs and no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, the MI308X is not intended for interactive graphics workloads. Its 0 MPixel/s pixel rate confirms that rasterization is not a function this accelerator performs.

The Intel Arc B770 wins in conventional graphics workloads. It has 128 ROPs and a pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s, plus 32 ray tracing cores. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it a fully featured consumer graphics card. The B770’s dual-slot form factor, PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, and standard power connectors (1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin) allow it to drop into typical desktop systems. Its 16 GB GDDR6 memory is far smaller than the MI308X’s pool, but it is paired with display outputs and a 225 W TDP that suits a gaming or workstation environment.

The data shows a clear split: the MI308X is a server-class accelerator for compute, while the B770 is a client GPU for rendering and display. For workloads that need FP32 or FP16 compute on large memory footprints, the MI308X dominates. For workloads that need rasterization, ray tracing, or API-level graphics support, the B770 is the only functional option.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different design philosophies. The AMD Instinct MI308X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture, which is optimized for compute rather than graphics. It has no ROPs and no ray tracing cores. Its FP16 performance is identical to FP32 at 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), indicating a compute-oriented design that does not rely on packed math acceleration. The chip is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4M per mm².

The Intel Arc B770 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture, which is a hybrid design supporting both graphics and compute. It includes 32 dedicated ray tracing cores and 128 ROPs. Its FP16 throughput is double its FP32 rate: 39.32 TFLOPS FP16 versus 19.66 TFLOPS FP32, a 2:1 ratio that indicates packed FP16 execution. The B770 is also built on a 5 nm TSMC process, but its die size is 368 mm². Transistor count and density are not recorded in the database for this chip.

The memory systems differ fundamentally. The MI308X uses HBM3 stacked memory with an 8192-bit bus width, while the B770 uses GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. The MI308X’s memory clock is 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective), whereas the B770’s memory clock is 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). Despite the B770’s higher memory clock, the MI308X’s vastly wider bus gives it over ten times the bandwidth.

The bus interfaces also diverge: the MI308X uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the B770 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The MI308X is an OAM module with no power connectors and no display outputs. The B770 is a dual-slot card with standard power connectors and a full set of display outputs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI308X | Intel Arc B770 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | BMG-G31 |

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Xe2-HPG |

| Generation | Instinct (MIx) | Battlemage (Arc 7) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 368 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 2100 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 192 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 5.32 TB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 19456 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 1216 | 256 |

| ROPs | 0 | 128 |

| RT Cores | null | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 307.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 614.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 19.66 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) | 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 225 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 1150 W | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2025-12-31 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | Alchemist |

Both cards share the same 5 nm TSMC process and are PCIe x16 devices, but nearly every other specification is divergent.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no benchmark scores for either card. Both have an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile of 50 against all GPUs. The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, and the win counts are 0 for both. This means there is no measured performance data to compare directly between the AMD Instinct MI308X and the Intel Arc B770.

What can be analyzed is the theoretical compute throughput from the recorded specifications. The AMD card’s FP32 output of 81.72 TFLOPS is 4.16 times the Intel card’s 19.66 TFLOPS. In FP16, the difference narrows slightly but remains large: 81.72 TFLOPS versus 39.32 TFLOPS, a 2.08x advantage for the AMD part. The texture rate favors AMD by a similar margin: 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 614.4 GTexel/s, a 4.16x difference that aligns exactly with the FP32 ratio.

On the graphics side, the Intel card has the only measurable pixel throughput: 307.2 GPixel/s versus 0 MPixel/s for the AMD card. The B770 also has 32 ray tracing cores, a feature the MI308X lacks entirely. Memory bandwidth is a decisive AMD win: 5.32 TB/s versus 512.0 GB/s, a 10.39x advantage that reflects the HBM3 versus GDDR6 split.

Power efficiency is not a benchmark score, but the TDP figures in the database show the Intel card draws 225 W versus 750 W for the AMD card. The Intel part delivers its 19.66 TFLOPS at less than one third the power draw, indicating a much higher FP32 efficiency per watt, though the AMD part still provides far more total throughput.

The release dates show the AMD card launched on 2023-12-05, while the Intel card has a recorded release date of 2025-12-31. The AMD card’s predecessor is Radeon Instinct, and the Intel card’s predecessor is Alchemist.

Given the empty benchmark arrays, any direct performance comparison relies entirely on the specification sheet. The recorded data confirms that the MI308X is a compute accelerator with unmatched memory capacity and bandwidth, while the B770 is a graphics card with rendering capabilities the MI308X does not offer. Neither card has a recorded performance advantage in actual tests, so the analysis rests on the architectural and specification deltas above.