AMD Instinct MI308X vs NVIDIA L4 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Instinct MI308X and the NVIDIA L4. The MI308X has no benchmark entries in the database, while the L4 has two recorded scores: 140,838 in Geekbench OpenCL and 121,306 in Geekbench Vulkan. The absence of comparable measurements means a direct score-to-score comparison cannot be constructed from the available data.

The L4's average benchmark score is 131,072, placing it in the 95th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti with an average score of 131,938, which is 0.7% higher than the L4's average. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation scores 135,218, a 3.1% advantage over the L4. The NVIDIA A10M also records 135,230, another 3.1% margin. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 posts 135,396, 3.2% ahead of the L4.

The MI308X, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50. This indicates the database holds no measured workloads for the MI308X, so any performance inference must rely on architectural specifications rather than empirical results.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators diverge sharply in design intent. The AMD Instinct MI308X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip based on CDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It contains 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The NVIDIA L4 uses the AD104 chip based on Ada Lovelace architecture, also fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a transistor density of 121.8 million per mm².

The MI308X is built around a massive HBM3 memory subsystem. It carries 192 GB of HBM3 across an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The L4 uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, providing 300.1 GB/s. This represents a fundamental difference in memory strategy: the MI308X pursues extreme capacity and bandwidth for large-scale compute workloads, while the L4 targets a smaller footprint with moderate bandwidth.

The compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The MI308X has 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and no ROPs, resulting in a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The L4 has 7,424 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, with a texture rate of 489.6 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s. The MI308X also lacks dedicated RT cores and tensor cores in the recorded data, while the L4 includes 60 RT cores and 240 tensor cores.

Clock behavior differs as well. The MI308X runs at a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz, with memory at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The L4 runs at a base clock of 795 MHz and a boost clock of 2040 MHz, with memory at 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective). Despite the L4's higher effective memory clock, its narrow bus and smaller capacity cannot approach the MI308X's aggregate bandwidth.

Floating-point throughput follows the hardware scale. The MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio). The L4 delivers 30.29 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio). The MI308X thus provides roughly 2.7 times the FP32 throughput of the L4, based on the recorded figures.

Power and physical design also separate the two. The MI308X has a TDP of 750 W, uses an OAM module form factor, requires a suggested 1150 W PSU, and has no power connectors listed. The L4 has a TDP of 72 W, fits in a single-slot design, requires a suggested 250 W PSU, and also has no power connectors listed. The MI308X uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the L4 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The L4 is 169 mm long and 56 mm high; the MI308X has no recorded dimensions.

API support also differs. The MI308X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, reflecting a compute-oriented device without a graphics pipeline. The L4 lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, indicating it retains graphics capability despite having no display outputs.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two accelerators by role. The AMD Instinct MI308X is a high-capacity compute accelerator. Its 192 GB of HBM3, 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, and 750 W TDP position it for memory-bound and compute-heavy workloads that require massive model residency and sustained throughput. The NVIDIA L4, with 24 GB GDDR6, 300.1 GB/s bandwidth, 30.29 TFLOPS FP32, and 72 W TDP, is a low-power, single-slot server GPU suited to smaller inference tasks and graphics-adjacent workloads.

The L4 has empirical benchmark data and a 95th percentile ranking. The MI308X has no measured scores, so its performance cannot be validated against the L4 or any other GPU in the database. Anyone choosing between the two must weigh the MI308X's raw specification advantages against the L4's verified benchmark results.

The MI308X is the choice when memory capacity and bandwidth dominate the requirement. The L4 is the choice when power efficiency, compact physical size, and validated performance matter more. The data does not support a single universal winner.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI308X | NVIDIA L4 |

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

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | AD104 |

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Generation | Instinct (MIx) | Server Ada (Lxx) |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | 35,800 million |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 795 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 2040 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1300 MHz, 5.2 Gbps effective | 1563 MHz, 12.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 192 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 5.32 TB/s | 300.1 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 19,456 | 7,424 |

| TMUs | 1,216 | 240 |

| ROPs | 0 | 80 |

| RT Cores | None listed | 60 |

| Tensor Cores | None listed | 240 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 163.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 489.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 30.29 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) | 30.29 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 72 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | 1150 W | 250 W |

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

| Display Outputs | No outputs | No outputs |

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

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | Not recorded | 169 mm, 56 mm |

| Production Status | Not recorded | Active |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2023-03-20 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | Server Ampere |

| Successor | Not recorded | Server Hopper |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X has a memory bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s, compared to the NVIDIA L4's 300.1 GB/s.

Q: Does the NVIDIA L4 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the L4 has 60 RT cores and also includes 240 tensor cores. The MI308X has no RT cores or tensor cores listed in the database.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The MI308X has a TDP of 750 W with a suggested 1150 W PSU, while the L4 has a TDP of 72 W with a suggested 250 W PSU.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 throughput?

A: The MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS in FP32, while the L4 delivers 30.29 TFLOPS.

Q: What benchmark scores exist for the NVIDIA L4?

A: The L4 scores 140,838 in Geekbench OpenCL and 121,306 in Geekbench Vulkan, with an average benchmark score of 131,072.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores for the MI308X?

A: No, the database has no benchmark entries for the MI308X, and its average benchmark score is 0.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI308X wins on raw compute scale. Its 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 output is 2.7 times the L4's 30.29 TFLOPS. Its 5.32 TB/s memory bandwidth is more than 17 times the L4's 300.1 GB/s. Its 192 GB memory capacity is eight times the L4's 24 GB. These figures point to workloads that need to hold very large models or datasets on-device and stream through them at high speed. The 8192-bit memory bus and HBM3 type support this interpretation. The MI308X also has more than 2.6 times the shading units of the L4 (19,456 versus 7,424) and more than five times the texture units (1,216 versus 240).

The NVIDIA L4 wins on efficiency and verified performance. Its 72 W TDP is roughly one-tenth of the MI308X's 750 W. Its single-slot form factor and 169 mm length make it suitable for dense server installations where physical space is constrained. Its PCIe 4.0 x16 interface is one generation behind the MI308X's PCIe 5.0 x16, but the L4 is the only one of the two with any recorded benchmark results. The L4's 95th percentile ranking and average score of 131,072, within 0.7% of the GeForce RTX 3090 Ti's 131,938, demonstrate that it competes with much larger GPUs on measured workloads.

The L4 also wins on graphics capability. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and it has 60 RT cores and 240 tensor cores. The MI308X lists N/A for all three graphics APIs and has no RT or tensor core counts recorded. For any workload that requires graphics APIs or ray tracing, the L4 is the only viable option in this pairing.

The MI308X wins on memory architecture by a decisive margin. The 5.32 TB/s bandwidth and 8192-bit bus are extreme figures that dwarf the L4's 192-bit bus and 300.1 GB/s. The MI308X also has a higher boost clock (2100 MHz versus 2040 MHz) and a higher base clock (1000 MHz versus 795 MHz), though the L4 compensates with a much higher effective memory clock (12.5 Gbps versus 5.2 Gbps).

The release dates place the L4 first, on 2023-03-20, followed by the MI308X on 2023-12-05. The L4's production status is Active, while the MI308X's status is not recorded. The L4 has a defined successor, Server Hopper, and predecessor, Server Ampere, while the MI308X lists only Radeon Instinct as its predecessor.

In practical terms, the MI308X suits high-end compute clusters where power and space are available and memory capacity is the limiting factor. The L4 suits power-constrained environments, smaller servers, and workloads that need verified performance with graphics API support. The data does not indicate that either card is a substitute for the other.