AMD Instinct MI308X vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Instinct MI308X and the NVIDIA N1X 40SM. Neither processor has any benchmark scores listed in the database, and both occupy the 50th percentile among all GPUs. Their average benchmark scores are zero in both cases, which means no performance comparison can be drawn from direct measurements.

What the data does show is a clear separation in raw compute capacity. The AMD Instinct MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS. That places the AMD part at roughly 3.4 times the FP32 throughput of the NVIDIA part. The same ratio holds for FP16, as both operate at 1:1 rates: 81.72 TFLOPS versus 24.02 TFLOPS.

Texture throughput follows the same pattern. The AMD part reaches 2,553.6 GTexel/s, the NVIDIA part reaches 750.7 GTexel/s. The AMD part delivers approximately 3.4 times the textured fill rate. Pixel rate is a different story. The AMD Instinct MI308X lists 0 MPixel/s, whereas the NVIDIA N1X 40SM lists 93.84 GPixel/s. This is not a case of one being faster; the AMD part has zero ROPs according to the database, so it does not perform conventional rasterized pixel output at all.

Memory bandwidth also shows a massive gap. The AMD Instinct MI308X has 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth across an 8192-bit bus, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 273.2 GB/s across a 256-bit bus. That is roughly 19.5 times the bandwidth on the AMD side. Memory capacity differs as well: 192 GB of HBM3 on the AMD part versus 128 GB of LPDDR5X on the NVIDIA part.

The absence of benchmark scores means the database cannot rank these two against each other in application-level tests. The compute, texture, and memory figures all point in the same direction, however. The AMD Instinct MI308X is built for far higher throughput workloads, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM is a smaller, integrated-class processor with different design priorities.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families entirely. The AMD Instinct MI308X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, part of the Instinct (MIx) generation. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture on the GB20B chip, part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. Both are built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, so the fabrication node is shared.

The AMD chip is physically large. Its die size is 1017 mm², and it integrates 153,000 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The NVIDIA chip is 382 mm², and its transistor count is listed as unknown in the database. No density figure is available for the NVIDIA part.

The compute resource allocation differs sharply. The AMD Instinct MI308X has 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 5,120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 40 ROPs. The NVIDIA part also includes 40 ray tracing cores and 160 tensor cores; the AMD part lists null values for both RT and tensor cores, meaning the database has no such entries for it.

Memory architecture is one of the clearest separators. The AMD part uses 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with a memory clock of 1300 MHz, effective 5.2 Gbps. The NVIDIA part uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with a memory clock of 1067 MHz, effective 8.5 Gbps. The NVIDIA memory runs at a higher effective data rate per pin, but the far wider AMD bus produces the enormous bandwidth advantage noted above.

Clock behavior also differs. The AMD part has a 1000 MHz base clock and a 2100 MHz boost clock. The NVIDIA part has a 741 MHz base clock and a 2346 MHz boost clock. The NVIDIA boost clock is higher, but its shading unit count is much lower, which explains the throughput gap.

Form factor and power delivery are unrelated as well. The AMD Instinct MI308X is an OAM module with no power connectors of its own and a suggested PSU of 1150 W. Its TDP is 750 W. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM is an IGP, so it has no separate power connectors either, but its TDP is listed as unknown. The NVIDIA part has one HDMI display output; the AMD part has no display outputs at all. Both use a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. Both list their graphics APIs as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI308X wins every throughput-oriented metric recorded in the database. It has higher FP32 and FP16 compute, higher texture rate, higher memory bandwidth, more memory capacity, more shading units, more texture mapping units, and a wider memory bus. Its 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 figure is roughly 3.4 times the NVIDIA part's 24.02 TFLOPS. Its 5.32 TB/s bandwidth is nearly twenty times the NVIDIA part's 273.2 GB/s. Its 192 GB of HBM3 exceeds the NVIDIA part's 128 GB of LPDDR5X. For any workload that scales with raw compute, texture throughput, or memory bandwidth, the database points entirely toward the AMD part.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM wins the metrics where the AMD part has no functional entry. It has 40 ROPs and a pixel rate of 93.84 GPixel/s, while the AMD part lists 0 ROPs and 0 MPixel/s. It has 40 ray tracing cores and 160 tensor cores, while the AMD part has no entries at all. It also has a higher boost clock at 2346 MHz versus 2100 MHz, and a higher effective memory data rate at 8.5 Gbps versus 5.2 Gbps. These are not small differences in isolation, but they do not offset the massive compute and bandwidth gap.

The NVIDIA part is also the only one of the two with a display output, listed as 1x HDMI. The AMD part is a compute accelerator with no outputs. The NVIDIA part is an integrated processor with a production status of Active, while the AMD part has no production status listed. The release dates differ as well: the AMD part is dated 2023-12-05, the NVIDIA part is dated 2026-05-31.

The database also shows a difference in installed base context. The AMD part's predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct; the NVIDIA part has no predecessor entry. Neither has a successor listed.

The Verdict

The data separates these two processors into distinct roles. The AMD Instinct MI308X is a high-throughput accelerator: 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, 5.32 TB/s memory bandwidth, 192 GB HBM3, and a 750 W TDP on an OAM module. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM is an integrated processor with 24.02 TFLOPS FP32, 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, 128 GB LPDDR5X, 40 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores.

Any workload dominated by FP32 or FP16 compute, texture throughput, or memory bandwidth falls to the AMD part. Any workload that requires rasterization output, ray tracing hardware, or tensor core acceleration falls to the NVIDIA part, at least based on the available entries. The AMD part has no ROPs and no RT or tensor core entries, so it cannot claim those capabilities from the data. The NVIDIA part simply does not have the compute or bandwidth to compete on the AMD part's terms.

The 750 W TDP on the AMD side versus an unknown TDP on the NVIDIA side reinforces the design intent. The AMD accelerator is a high-power module for dedicated compute installations. The NVIDIA IGP is a lower-profile integrated solution, though its power draw is not recorded.

There is no benchmark score to settle application-level performance. The architectural data, however, is unambiguous about scaling potential. The AMD Instinct MI308X is the choice for raw throughput. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM is the choice when integrated form factor, display output, ROP-based pixel processing, or RT and tensor hardware matter more than raw FP32 throughput.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher FP32 compute?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS, which is about 3.4 times the NVIDIA N1X 40SM's 24.02 TFLOPS.

Q: Do both processors use the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process.

Q: What memory types and capacities do they use?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X uses 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI308X have ray tracing cores?

A: The database lists null values for ray tracing cores on the AMD part. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 40 ray tracing cores.

Q: Which processor has a display output?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 1x HDMI. The AMD Instinct MI308X has no display outputs.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X has 5.32 TB/s, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 273.2 GB/s. The AMD part's bandwidth is roughly 19.5 times higher.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI308X | NVIDIA N1X 40SM |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | GB20B |

| Generation | Instinct (MIx) | Blackwell IGP (N1x) |

| Process node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Die size | 1017 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | unknown |

| Base clock | 1000 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2100 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1300 MHz, 5.2 Gbps effective | 1067 MHz, 8.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 192 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory type | HBM3 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bus width | 8192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 5.32 TB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading units | 19456 | 5120 |

| TMUs | 1216 | 320 |

| ROPs | 0 | 40 |

| RT cores | null | 40 |

| Tensor cores | null | 160 |

| Pixel rate | 0 MPixel/s | 93.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 750.7 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 24.02 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) | 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | unknown |

| Slot width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Power connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | 1150 W | null |

| Bus interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI |

| Release date | 2023-12-05 | 2026-05-31 |

| Production status | null | Active |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | null |