AMD Instinct MI308X vs NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

The Verdict

The data separates these two GPUs into entirely different computing segments. The AMD Instinct MI308X is a massive accelerator for server and data center workloads, built on the CDNA 3.0 architecture and designed to process enormous datasets. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation is a low-power mobile GPU for laptops and portable workstations, based on the Ada Lovelace architecture and intended for graphics and AI inference in constrained environments.

The benchmark database records no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two products, and their average benchmark scores are both recorded as zero. Their percentile ranks against all GPUs are identical at 50. This means the database does not provide any comparative performance measurements to rank one above the other. Instead, the differences in architecture, memory, compute capacity, and power envelope define their distinct roles.

The AMD Instinct MI308X is the choice for models that require massive memory capacity and throughput, such as large-scale AI training, high-performance computing, and scientific simulations. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation is the choice for mobile workstations that need rasterization, ray tracing, and tensor acceleration within a 50 W power budget. No single product wins in overall performance because the database lacks direct measurements; the selection depends entirely on workload type and physical environment.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI308X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip with the CDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 153,000 million transistors on a die size of 1017 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation uses the AD107 chip with the Ada Lovelace architecture, also on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It contains 18,900 million transistors on a die size of 159 mm², giving a transistor density of 118.9 million per mm². The AMD chip is 858 mm² larger in die area and has over eight times the transistor count.

The AMD Instinct MI308X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 texture mapping units, but it has zero raster operation units and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. It records no directX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API support. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation has 3,072 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 48 raster operation units. It includes 24 ray tracing cores and 96 tensor cores, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part is purely a compute accelerator with no graphics output, while the NVIDIA part is a full graphics processor.

Memory architecture differs completely. The AMD Instinct MI308X uses 192 GB of HBM3 memory with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD memory bus is 64 times wider, and its bandwidth is over 20 times higher. The AMD card has no display outputs, while the NVIDIA card has outputs described as portable device dependent.

Clock speeds also differ. The AMD base clock is 1000 MHz and boost is 2100 MHz. The NVIDIA base clock is 1635 MHz and boost is 2115 MHz. The NVIDIA chip runs significantly higher at base, but the boost clocks are nearly identical. The AMD memory clock is 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective, while the NVIDIA memory clock is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective. The NVIDIA memory operates at a higher effective rate despite the much narrower bus.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for these two GPUs. The wins count for each product is zero. The average benchmark score for both is zero, and neither product has any entries in the benchmarks array. This absence of direct measurements means the database cannot show a single comparative score.

What the recorded data does show are raw specifications that indicate capability differences. The AMD Instinct MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 and 81.72 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 1:1 ratio. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 12.99 TFLOPS of FP32 and 12.99 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 1:1 ratio. The AMD part provides roughly 6.3 times the FP32 throughput and 6.3 times the FP16 throughput, based on the recorded numbers.

Texture rate also diverges. The AMD texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s, while the NVIDIA texture rate is 203.0 GTexel/s. The AMD part is about 12.6 times faster in texture fill rate. Pixel rate, however, favors the NVIDIA part: the AMD pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s, while the NVIDIA pixel rate is 101.5 GPixel/s. The AMD accelerator cannot rasterize at all, while the NVIDIA mobile GPU has a full raster pipeline.

Power consumption shows a stark contrast. The AMD TDP is 750 W with a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The NVIDIA TDP is 50 W with no suggested PSU recorded. The AMD part consumes 15 times the power of the NVIDIA part, according to the recorded TDP values. This power difference aligns with their physical formats: the AMD Instinct MI308X is an OAM module, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) for mobile devices.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X has 192 GB of HBM3 memory, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation includes 24 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate. The AMD Instinct MI308X records no ray tracing cores and no DirectX support.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X has a TDP of 750 W, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation has a TDP of 50 W. The AMD part also lists a suggested PSU of 1150 W, while the NVIDIA part has no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation has a boost clock of 2115 MHz, which is marginally higher than the AMD Instinct MI308X boost clock of 2100 MHz.

Q: Can either GPU output video to a display?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X has no display outputs. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation has display outputs described as portable device dependent.

Q: Which GPU has a larger die and more transistors?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X has a die size of 1017 mm² and 153,000 million transistors. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation has a die size of 159 mm² and 18,900 million transistors.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI308X wins in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 performance of 81.72 TFLOPS and FP16 performance of 81.72 TFLOPS vastly exceed the NVIDIA part's 12.99 TFLOPS in both precisions. Its texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s is much higher than the 203.0 GTexel/s of the NVIDIA part. For workloads that rely on massive matrix operations, dense data movement, or large-scale simulation, the AMD accelerator provides significantly more arithmetic capability per the recorded numbers.

The AMD Instinct MI308X also wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. With 192 GB of HBM3 memory and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, it can hold and process datasets far larger than the NVIDIA part's 8 GB and 256.0 GB/s. The 8192-bit bus width enables a data path that the 128-bit bus of the NVIDIA part cannot approach. This makes the AMD card suitable for memory-bound workloads such as training large neural networks or processing scientific datasets that exceed the memory capacity of smaller GPUs.

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation wins in graphics and rendering features. It has 48 raster operation units and a pixel rate of 101.5 GPixel/s, while the AMD part reports 0 MPixel/s. It includes 24 ray tracing cores and 96 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI inference. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD part lists no API support. The NVIDIA GPU is also the only one of the two with display outputs, described as portable device dependent.

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation wins in power efficiency and physical integration. Its 50 W TDP is 15 times lower than the 750 W TDP of the AMD part. It is an IGP designed for mobile devices, whereas the AMD part is an OAM module with no power connectors listed and a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The NVIDIA part has a production status of active, while the AMD part has no production status recorded. For laptops and portable workstations where power and space are limited, the NVIDIA GPU is the only viable option in this comparison.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every recorded specification field. The AMD Instinct MI308X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture with the Aqua Vanjaram chip, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD107 chip. The AMD part belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation, while the NVIDIA part belongs to the Ada-MW generation and the GeForce 20-series.

Process node is identical at 5 nm, and both use TSMC as the foundry. Transistor counts differ: 153,000 million for AMD versus 18,900 million for NVIDIA. Die size differs: 1017 mm² for AMD versus 159 mm² for NVIDIA. Transistor density is 150.4 million per mm² for AMD versus 118.9 million per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock specifications differ. AMD base clock is 1000 MHz, NVIDIA base clock is 1635 MHz. AMD boost clock is 2100 MHz, NVIDIA boost clock is 2115 MHz. Memory clock is 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective for AMD, and 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective for NVIDIA.

Memory configuration differs completely. AMD uses 192 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA uses 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute unit counts differ. AMD has 19,456 shading units, 1,216 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. NVIDIA has 3,072 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. AMD has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores recorded, while NVIDIA has 24 ray tracing cores and 96 tensor cores.

Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for AMD and 101.5 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s for AMD and 203.0 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32 is 81.72 TFLOPS for AMD and 12.99 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 is also 81.72 TFLOPS for AMD and 12.99 TFLOPS for NVIDIA, both with a 1:1 ratio.

Power specifications differ. AMD TDP is 750 W with a suggested PSU of 1150 W. NVIDIA TDP is 50 W with no suggested PSU. AMD is an OAM Module with no power connectors, while NVIDIA is an IGP with no power connectors. AMD uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while NVIDIA uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Display outputs: AMD has none, NVIDIA has portable device dependent outputs. API support: AMD has no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, while NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Release dates differ: AMD released on 2023-12-05, NVIDIA released on 2023-03-20. The AMD predecessor is Radeon Instinct, while the NVIDIA predecessor is Ampere-MW and its successor is Blackwell-MW. The NVIDIA production status is active, while the AMD production status is not recorded. Neither product has a launch MSRP recorded.