AMD Instinct MI325X vs AMD Radeon 880M Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the architectural generation of each GPU?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, belonging to the Instinct (MIx) generation. The AMD Radeon 880M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on the Strix Point chip, belonging to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare between the two?

A: The Instinct MI325X has 19,456 shading units, while the Radeon 880M has 768 shading units. This represents a 25.3x difference in shading hardware, directly influencing the FP32 compute gap.

Q: What are the memory configurations for each GPU?

A: The Instinct MI325X features 256 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus with 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 880M uses System Shared memory, with System Dependent bandwidth, meaning it relies on the host system's RAM.

Q: What is the FP32 compute throughput for each?

A: The Instinct MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, while the Radeon 880M delivers 4.454 TFLOPS FP32. Both achieve FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with their FP32 figures.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Radeon 880M has a boost clock of 2900 MHz, compared to the Instinct MI325X's boost clock of 2100 MHz. Despite the clock disadvantage, the Instinct MI325X's much larger shader array yields far higher throughput.

Q: What is the thermal design power for each product?

A: The Instinct MI325X has a TDP of 1000 W, while the Radeon 880M has a TDP of 15 W. The Instinct MI325X also suggests a 1400 W power supply, whereas the Radeon 880M has no suggested PSU listed.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their design goals. The Instinct MI325X is built on CDNA 3.0, a compute-optimized architecture for data center acceleration. The Radeon 880M uses RDNA 3.5, a graphics-focused architecture for mobile integrated graphics. This distinction drives every major hardware decision.

Fabrication processes differ: the Instinct MI325X uses a 5 nm TSMC process, while the Radeon 880M uses a 4 nm TSMC process. Despite the smaller node for the Radeon, the Instinct MI325X integrates 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, versus 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die for the Radeon. Transistor density is similar at 150.4M / mm² for the Instinct and 145.9M / mm² for the Radeon.

The compute pipelines are vastly different in scale. The Instinct MI325X has 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs, reflecting its non-rasterization workload. The Radeon 880M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The Instinct MI325X has no RT cores listed, and its pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s, confirming it is not designed for traditional graphics output. In contrast, the Radeon 880M achieves a pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s.

Clock behavior highlights the different operating envelopes. The Instinct MI325X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and boost of 2100 MHz. The Radeon 880M has a base clock of 400 MHz and boost of 2900 MHz. The Radeon's higher boost clock indicates a design optimized for bursty, power-limited mobile workloads, while the Instinct runs at a steadier, higher-power state.

Memory architecture is another major split. The Instinct MI325X has 256 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus, yielding 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 880M uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth, meaning its performance scales with the host laptop's memory subsystem. The Instinct's memory clock is listed as 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective, while the Radeon's memory clock is simply "System Shared."

Bus interfaces also differ: the Instinct MI325X uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Radeon 880M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The Instinct is an OAM Module with no display outputs, while the Radeon is an IGP with display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent." API support diverges completely: the Instinct lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A, while the Radeon supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains benchmark results only for the Radeon 880M, as the Instinct MI325X has no recorded benchmark scores and an average benchmark score of 0. The Radeon 880M's average benchmark score is 8,436, placing it at the 43rd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX with an average score of 8,427 (0.1% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 at 8,458 (0.3% behind), the AMD Radeon HD 8870M at 8,462 (0.3% behind), and the AMD Radeon R9 M375X at 8,325 (1.3% ahead).

Looking at the Radeon 880M's individual results, the Geekbench Vulkan score of 40,006 is the strongest, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 31,285. In Passmark tests, the G3D score is 7,615, while the G2D score is 969. The DirectX 11 Passmark score is 73, DirectX 9 is 97, and DirectX 10 and 12 are 31 and 32 respectively. The GPU Compute Passmark score is 3,719. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 535.

The Instinct MI325X has no benchmark entries, so no direct head-to-head comparison can be made from recorded data. The wins count is 0 for both sides, reflecting the absence of shared test data. However, the theoretical compute figures provide context. The Instinct MI325X's FP32 of 81.72 TFLOPS is roughly 18.3 times the Radeon 880M's 4.454 TFLOPS. The texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s for the Instinct is about 18.4 times the Radeon's 139.2 GTexel/s.

The Instinct MI325X's percentile rank of 50 is higher than the Radeon's 43, but this is based on the database's overall GPU distribution rather than direct measurements. The Radeon's nearest rival data shows it sits in a competitive mid-range integrated GPU tier, with deltas under 1.5% against older discrete mobile GPUs.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two products:

• Chip: Aqua Vanjaram (Instinct MI325X) vs Strix Point (Radeon 880M)
• Architecture: CDNA 3.0 vs RDNA 3.5
• Generation: Instinct (MIx) vs Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile)
• Process Node: 5 nm vs 4 nm
• Transistors: 153,000 million vs 34,000 million
• Die Size: 1017 mm² vs 233 mm²
• Transistor Density: 150.4M / mm² vs 145.9M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1000 MHz vs 400 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2100 MHz vs 2900 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1500 MHz 6 Gbps effective vs System Shared
• Memory Size: 256 GB vs System Shared
• Memory Type: HBM3e vs System Shared
• Memory Bus Width: 8192 bit vs System Shared
• Memory Bandwidth: 6.14 TB/s vs System Dependent
• Shading Units: 19,456 vs 768
• TMUs: 1,216 vs 48
• ROPs: 0 vs 16
• RT Cores: null vs 12
• Pixel Rate: 0 MPixel/s vs 46.40 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 2,553.6 GTexel/s vs 139.2 GTexel/s
• FP32: 81.72 TFLOPS vs 4.454 TFLOPS
• FP16: 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) vs 4.454 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 1000 W vs 15 W
• Slot Width: OAM Module vs IGP
• Suggested PSU: 1400 W vs null
• Bus Interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 vs PCIe 4.0 x8
• Display Outputs: No outputs vs Portable Device Dependent
• DirectX: N/A vs 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• OpenGL: N/A vs 4.6
• Vulkan: N/A vs 1.4
• Production Status: null vs Active
• Release Date: 2024-10-09 vs 2024-07-14
• Predecessor: Radeon Instinct vs Navi II IGP
• Percentile Vs All GPUs: 50 vs 43
• Average Benchmark Score: 0 vs 8,436

Where Each One Wins

The Instinct MI325X wins decisively in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 of 81.72 TFLOPS and texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s place it in a category for data center acceleration, large-scale matrix operations, and high-bandwidth memory workloads. The 256 GB HBM3e pool with 6.14 TB/s bandwidth is designed for massive datasets that would never fit in the Radeon's shared system memory. The 8192-bit bus width and PCIe 5.0 x16 interface reinforce its role as a server-class compute module. The absence of display outputs and graphics API support confirms it is not intended for rendering to a screen.

The Radeon 880M wins in integrated graphics versatility. Its 12 ray tracing cores, 16 ROPs, and full API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 make it suitable for gaming and graphical applications on mobile devices. The 2900 MHz boost clock and 46.40 GPixel/s pixel rate allow for responsive frame rendering. Its 15 W TDP means it operates within mobile power budgets, unlike the 1000 W TDP of the Instinct which requires a 1400 W suggested PSU. The Radeon also has measured benchmark scores, with an average of 8,436 and a 43rd percentile ranking, placing it near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX and above the AMD Radeon R9 M375X by 1.3%.

The performance split is clear. The Instinct MI325X is for compute-heavy, non-visual tasks where massive memory bandwidth and FP32 throughput dominate. The Radeon 880M is for graphics rendering, ray tracing, and general-purpose GPU compute in a power-constrained mobile form factor. The data shows no overlap in use cases: one has zero ROPs and no outputs, the other has 16 ROPs and portable display support. Users requiring server acceleration would choose the Instinct, while those needing integrated graphics in a laptop would rely on the Radeon.