AMD Instinct MI308X vs Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile Comparison

The AMD Instinct MI308X and Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile occupy opposite extremes of the GPU spectrum, and the recorded data confirms there is no meaningful contest between them. The MI308X is a 750 W OAM accelerator built for dense compute, while the UHD 710 Mobile is a 15 W integrated graphics solution for basic portable displays. The verdict, based solely on the database fields, is straightforward: the MI308X dominates in every measurable compute category, while the UHD 710 Mobile holds a clear advantage in integration and power efficiency. Users requiring HBM3 memory, multi-TB/s bandwidth, or server-class FP32 throughput should select the MI308X; those needing a simple IGP with display outputs for a laptop should select the UHD 710 Mobile.

The Verdict

The data separates these products into two non-overlapping roles. The AMD Instinct MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, 192 GB of HBM3 memory, and 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth, making it the only choice for large-scale compute workloads such as AI training or scientific simulation. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile provides 307.2 GFLOPS FP32, system-shared memory, and a 15 W TDP, which suits basic desktop rendering and video output. The MI308X has no display outputs, so it cannot drive a monitor; the UHD 710 Mobile has display outputs dependent on the portable device, confirming its role as a display-capable IGP. Benchmark results show zero wins for either side in the head-to-head fields, but the specification gap is so large that the percentile ranking of 50 for both only reflects the absence of recorded benchmark scores, not performance equivalence. The MI308X is for compute accelerators in servers; the UHD 710 Mobile is for integrated graphics in laptops.

Where Each One Wins

The MI308X wins in raw compute, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth. Its 19456 shading units, 1216 texture mapping units, and 2,553.6 GTexel/s texture rate are orders of magnitude above the UHD 710 Mobile's 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 9.600 GTexel/s. The MI308X also delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, compared to the UHD 710 Mobile's 614.4 GFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, which means the MI308X processes half-precision workloads at a vastly higher rate. The 8192-bit memory bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth on the MI308X dwarf the system-shared, system-dependent bandwidth of the Intel part.

The UHD 710 Mobile wins in integration and power. Its 15 W TDP is 50 times lower than the MI308X's 750 W TDP. The Intel part is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface, requiring no power connectors and no external slot, whereas the MI308X is an OAM Module with a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface and a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The UHD 710 Mobile also supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI308X reports N/A for all graphics APIs, meaning it cannot run standard graphics workloads. The UHD 710 Mobile has a production status of Active, while the MI308X has no recorded production status.

Architecture Differences

The MI308X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture with the Aqua Vanjaram chip, built on a 5 nm TSMC process with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The UHD 710 Mobile uses the Generation 12.2 architecture with the Raptor Lake chip, built on a 10 nm Intel process with no recorded transistor count or die size. The MI308X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz, with memory running at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The UHD 710 Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1200 MHz, with system-shared memory. The MI308X has 0 ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, confirming it is not designed for rasterization. The UHD 710 Mobile has 4 ROPs and a pixel rate of 4.800 GPixel/s, confirming it can handle pixel output. The MI308X belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation and lists Radeon Instinct as its predecessor, while the UHD 710 Mobile belongs to the HD Graphics-M (Raptor Lake) generation and lists Arc Graphics-M as its successor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, while the UHD 710 Mobile delivers 307.2 GFLOPS FP32. The MI308X is approximately 266 times faster in FP32 (calculated from the recorded 81.72 TFLOPS versus 307.2 GFLOPS), though the exact multiplier is not stored in the database.

Q: Can the MI308X output to a display?

A: No. The MI308X has display outputs listed as "No outputs" and reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The UHD 710 Mobile has display outputs listed as "Portable Device Dependent" and supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: The MI308X uses 192 GB of HBM3 memory with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The UHD 710 Mobile uses system-shared memory with a system-shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The MI308X has a 750 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1150 W, with no power connectors because it is an OAM Module. The UHD 710 Mobile has a 15 W TDP, no power connectors listed, and no suggested PSU because it is an IGP.

Q: Which GPU is newer?

A: The UHD 710 Mobile was released on 2023-01-03, while the MI308X was released on 2023-12-05. The MI308X is newer by approximately 11 months.

Q: What are the shading unit counts?

A: The MI308X has 19456 shading units and 1216 TMUs. The UHD 710 Mobile has 128 shading units and 8 TMUs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, and the database records zero wins for each GPU. However, the specification data provides clear performance deltas. The MI308X's FP32 output of 81.72 TFLOPS exceeds the UHD 710 Mobile's 307.2 GFLOPS by a factor of 266. The FP16 comparison is similarly lopsided: the MI308X produces 81.72 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the UHD 710 Mobile produces 614.4 GFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, making the MI308X roughly 133 times faster in FP16. The texture rate of the MI308X is 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 9.600 GTexel/s for the UHD 710 Mobile, a difference of 266 times. The pixel rate goes the other way: the UHD 710 Mobile achieves 4.800 GPixel/s, while the MI308X is at 0 MPixel/s, meaning the Intel part is the only one capable of pixel output. Memory bandwidth is 5.32 TB/s for the MI308X versus system-dependent for the UHD 710 Mobile, so no direct numeric comparison exists, but the MI308X's dedicated HBM3 stack clearly provides a fixed, high-bandwidth pathway. The MI308X's 8192-bit bus versus the UHD 710 Mobile's system-shared bus further confirms the bandwidth advantage. The clock speeds also differ: the MI308X boosts to 2100 MHz, while the UHD 710 Mobile boosts to 1200 MHz, a 900 MHz gap. The MI308X's base clock of 1000 MHz is higher than the UHD 710 Mobile's boost clock of 1200 MHz only in a narrow sense, but the actual boost clocks show the MI308X running 75% higher. The process node difference, 5 nm versus 10 nm, and the transistor count of 153,000 million versus no recorded count, underscore the scale gap. In the database, the MI308X's 50th percentile and the UHD 710 Mobile's 50th percentile are identical only because no benchmark scores are recorded for either, so the percentile fields should not be read as equal performance.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every recorded field. The MI308X uses a 5 nm process from TSMC with 153,000 million transistors and a 1017 mm² die, while the UHD 710 Mobile uses a 10 nm process from Intel with no transistor or die data. The MI308X has 19456 shading units, 1216 TMUs, and 0 ROPs; the UHD 710 Mobile has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The MI308X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz; the UHD 710 Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1200 MHz. Memory is 192 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth for the MI308X, versus system-shared memory, system-shared bus width, and system-dependent bandwidth for the UHD 710 Mobile. The MI308X has a 750 W TDP, an OAM Module slot width, no power connectors, a suggested PSU of 1150 W, and a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. The UHD 710 Mobile has a 15 W TDP, an IGP slot width, no power connectors, no suggested PSU, and a Ring Bus interface. The MI308X has no display outputs and N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan; the UHD 710 Mobile has portable-device-dependent display outputs and supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI308X has no production status, while the UHD 710 Mobile is Active. The MI308X was released on 2023-12-05 and lists Radeon Instinct as its predecessor; the UHD 710 Mobile was released on 2023-01-03 and lists Arc Graphics-M as its successor. The MI308X reports a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s and an FP32 of 81.72 TFLOPS, while the UHD 710 Mobile reports a texture rate of 9.600 GTexel/s, an FP32 of 307.2 GFLOPS, an FP16 of 614.4 GFLOPS (2:1), and a pixel rate of 4.800 GPixel/s. The MI308X FP16 is 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) and its pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s. The power connector field is None for the MI308X and null for the UHD 710 Mobile. The release dates differ by 11 months, with the MI308X coming later. The process node, transistor density, memory type, bus width, and API support all show no overlap between the two parts.