AMD Instinct MI325X vs AMD Radeon PRO V710 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the primary architecture differences between the AMD Instinct MI325X and the AMD Radeon PRO V710?

A: The Instinct MI325X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture with the Aqua Vanjaram chip, while the Radeon PRO V710 uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 32 chip (codename Wheat Nas). Both are fabricated on TSMC’s 5 nm process, but the MI325X is built for compute acceleration with the Instinct (MIx) generation, whereas the V710 belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The MI325X has 256 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus with 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The V710 has 28 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 224-bit bus with 504.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI325X’s memory bandwidth is over 12 times higher, and its capacity is roughly 9 times larger.

Q: Which card delivers higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, while the V710 delivers 27.65 TFLOPS FP32. Both achieve their FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, so the MI325X is approximately 3 times faster in both precisions.

Q: What are the thermal and power specifications?

A: The MI325X has a TDP of 1000 W and requires a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The V710 has a TDP of 158 W and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The V710 uses a single 8-pin power connector, while the MI325X is an OAM module with no power connectors listed.

Q: Which GPU has better benchmark placement in the database?

A: The V710 holds an 88th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 58,657. The MI325X has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of 0.

Q: Do either of these cards support display outputs?

A: Neither card has display outputs. The MI325X lists “No outputs,” and the V710 also lists “No outputs.” They are both intended for compute or workstation use rather than direct display connection.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO V710 wins in every measurable benchmark category in the database. It has recorded scores in two tests: 853 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and 116,460 in Geekbench OpenCL. Its average benchmark score is 58,657, and it ranks in the 88th percentile of all GPUs. The V710 also wins decisively on pixel throughput with 192.0 GPixel/s versus 0 MPixel/s for the MI325X, and it has 96 ROPs compared to 0 for the MI325X.

The AMD Instinct MI325X wins on raw compute and memory resources. It has 19,456 shading units versus 3,456 for the V710, 1,216 TMUs versus 216, and a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 432.0 GTexel/s. Its FP32 and FP16 throughput of 81.72 TFLOPS is nearly triple the V710’s 27.65 TFLOPS. The MI325X also leads in memory capacity (256 GB vs 28 GB), memory bus width (8192 bit vs 224 bit), and memory bandwidth (6.14 TB/s vs 504.0 GB/s).

The V710 wins on clock speeds. Its base clock is 1900 MHz and boost clock is 2000 MHz, while the MI325X has a 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost. The V710 also has a higher memory clock at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the MI325X.

The MI325X wins on interface generation with PCIe 5.0 x16, while the V710 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The MI325X also has a larger die (1017 mm² versus 346 mm²) and more transistors (153,000 million versus 28,100 million), yielding a transistor density of 150.4M / mm² versus 81.2M / mm².

The V710 wins on power efficiency and physical footprint. Its 158 W TDP is dramatically lower than the MI325X’s 1000 W, and its suggested PSU of 450 W is far below the 1400 W suggested for the MI325X. The V710 is a single-slot card with a 1x 8-pin connector, while the MI325X is an OAM module.

The V710 also wins on software API support. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI325X lists N/A for all three APIs. The V710’s 54 ray tracing cores provide hardware RT capability that the MI325X does not list.

Architecture Differences

The MI325X is built on CDNA 3.0, AMD’s compute-focused architecture, using the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The V710 is built on RDNA 3.0, the graphics-focused architecture, using the Navi 32 chip with the codename Wheat Nas. This fundamental split explains most of the performance profile differences between the two.

The MI325X has 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, for a density of 150.4M / mm². The V710 has 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, for a density of 81.2M / mm². Both use TSMC’s 5 nm process, so the MI325X’s much larger die and transistor count reflect its role as a high-end accelerator rather than a graphics card.

Memory architecture differs sharply. The MI325X uses HBM3e with a 8192-bit bus and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The V710 uses GDDR6 with a 224-bit bus and 504.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI325X’s memory subsystem is designed for massive data movement in compute workloads, while the V710’s is conventional for a graphics-class GPU.

The MI325X has no ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, indicating it is not designed for rasterization output. The V710 has 96 ROPs and a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s, enabling traditional graphics rendering. The V710 also has 54 ray tracing cores, while the MI325X lists none.

The MI325X supports PCIe 5.0 x16, while the V710 supports PCIe 4.0 x16. The MI325X is an OAM module with no power connectors, while the V710 is a single-slot card with a 1x 8-pin connector. Neither card has display outputs.

The V710’s API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI325X lists N/A for these APIs, consistent with its compute-only orientation. The V710’s release date is 2024-10-02, and the MI325X’s release date is 2024-10-09.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification field. The MI325X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture and the Aqua Vanjaram chip, while the V710 uses RDNA 3.0 and the Navi 32 chip (Wheat Nas). Their generations differ: Instinct (MIx) versus Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series).

The MI325X has 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die; the V710 has 28,100 million on 346 mm². Transistor density is 150.4M / mm² versus 81.2M / mm². Base clocks are 1000 MHz versus 1900 MHz, and boost clocks are 2100 MHz versus 2000 MHz. Memory clocks are 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity is 256 GB versus 28 GB. Memory type is HBM3e versus GDDR6. Bus width is 8192 bit versus 224 bit. Bandwidth is 6.14 TB/s versus 504.0 GB/s.

Shading units are 19,456 versus 3,456. TMUs are 1,216 versus 216. ROPs are 0 versus 96. The V710 has 54 ray tracing cores; the MI325X lists none. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 432.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 81.72 TFLOPS versus 27.65 TFLOPS. FP16 is 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 27.65 TFLOPS (1:1).

TDP is 1000 W versus 158 W. Slot width is OAM Module versus Single-slot. Power connectors are None versus 1x 8-pin. Suggested PSU is 1400 W versus 450 W. Bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Both have no display outputs.

API support differs: the MI325X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, while the V710 lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Release dates are 2024-10-09 for the MI325X and 2024-10-02 for the V710. Their predecessors also differ: Radeon Instinct for the MI325X and Radeon Pro Vega for the V710.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the MI325X and the V710. The MI325X has zero recorded benchmark scores and an average benchmark score of 0. The V710 has two recorded scores: 853 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and 116,460 in Geekbench OpenCL, with an average of 58,657.

The V710’s nearest rivals in the database provide context for its performance. The NVIDIA P102-100 scores 58,528 on average, placing the V710 0.2% ahead. The AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT scores 58,392, placing the V710 0.5% ahead. The Intel Arc A570M scores 58,239, placing the V710 0.7% ahead. The AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM scores 58,085, placing the V710 1% ahead.

These margins show that the V710 sits in a tightly packed performance cluster. Its 88th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms it is a solid performer relative to the broader database, but the 0.2% to 1% deltas over its nearest rivals indicate that the V710 does not dramatically outclass its immediate competition.

The MI325X cannot be placed in this benchmark hierarchy because no scores are recorded for it. Its 50th percentile ranking and average score of 0 reflect the absence of data rather than a measured performance level. The database provides no basis for quantitative comparison between the two cards on actual benchmark runs.

The compute specifications tell a story that the benchmark data cannot. The MI325X’s 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 output, 6.14 TB/s bandwidth, and 256 GB memory capacity are far above the V710’s 27.65 TFLOPS and 504.0 GB/s. These are theoretical rates, however, and the MI325X has no recorded results to confirm real-world performance.

The V710’s benchmark data indicates it performs near the top of its class, sitting 0.2% to 1% above four closely matched rivals. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 116,460 is its strongest recorded result, while its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 853 is modest relative to that OpenCL figure. The MI325X has no comparable measurements.

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon PRO V710 is the only one of these two cards with recorded performance data in the database. Its 88th percentile ranking, average benchmark score of 58,657, and wins in both recorded tests (3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 853 and Geekbench OpenCL at 116,460) make it the clear choice for any user relying on measurable benchmark results. It also offers graphics features the MI325X lacks, including 96 ROPs, 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate, 54 ray tracing cores, and full API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its 158 W TDP and 450 W suggested PSU make it far more practical for conventional system integration, and its single-slot design with a 1x 8-pin connector is straightforward to install.

The AMD Instinct MI325X is the choice when theoretical compute and memory resources matter more than recorded benchmarks. Its 19,456 shading units, 1,216 TMUs, 2,553.6 GTexel/s texture rate, and 81.72 TFLOPS FP32/FP16 throughput place it in a different performance class on paper. Its 256 GB HBM3e memory with 6.14 TB/s bandwidth and 8192-bit bus are unmatched by the V710’s 28 GB GDDR6 with 504.0 GB/s. The MI325X also uses PCIe 5.0 x16 versus the V710’s PCIe 4.0 x16. However, the MI325X requires a 1000 W TDP and 1400 W suggested PSU, and its OAM Module form factor with no power connectors means it is not a drop-in card for typical systems.

Users who need graphics rendering, ray tracing, or standard API compatibility should select the V710. Users who need maximum memory capacity, bandwidth, and compute density for accelerator-class workloads should select the MI325X, provided their platform can support its power and form factor requirements. The database currently validates the V710’s performance with actual scores, while the MI325X’s capabilities remain unverified by recorded benchmarks.