AMD Instinct MI325X vs AMD Radeon RX 7800M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no shared benchmark submissions for the AMD Instinct MI325X and the AMD Radeon RX 7800M. The Instinct MI325X has no benchmark entries, while the RX 7800M carries ten recorded test scores. Direct numerical comparison is therefore impossible. The absence of overlapping data points means the head-to-head section must rely on the architectural specifications and the RX 7800M's verified performance profile.

The RX 7800M's average benchmark score of 27883 places it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals confirm a tightly clustered performance band. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 scores 27839, a delta of 0.2 percent. The AMD Radeon Pro W5500X reaches 27973, which is 0.3 percent higher. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti records 28020, sitting 0.5 percent above. The AMD FirePro S7150 trails at 28117, a difference of 0.8 percent. These deltas show the RX 7800M operating within a narrow competitive window, where a few points separate it from its closest peers.

Within its own benchmark suite, the RX 7800M shows clear strengths. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 126668 exceeds the OpenCL score of 120778 by roughly 4.9 percent. The Passmark G3D score of 17613 dominates the DirectX-specific results, which range from 89 to 176. The GPU Compute score of 9342 indicates substantial non-graphics throughput relative to the DirectX 9 score of 174 or the DirectX 11 score of 176. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 2994 is the only modern, full-scene test in the set, and it confirms the card's capability in current DirectX 12 workloads.

The Instinct MI325X, by contrast, has zero recorded benchmark scores and a percentile rank of 50. Its average benchmark score is 0. This does not indicate a failure; it reflects the absence of submitted results for an accelerator that targets data center workloads rather than consumer testing suites. The database cannot produce a win count for either product because no head-to-head tests exist.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI325X have any benchmark results in the database?

A: No. The Instinct MI325X has an empty benchmark array, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals listed. The RX 7800M has ten recorded scores across 3DMark, Geekbench, and Passmark tests.

Q: How does the RX 7800M compare to its closest competitors?

A: The RX 7800M's average score of 27883 is 0.2 percent above the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (27839) and 0.3 percent below the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X (27973). It sits 0.5 percent behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (28020) and 0.8 percent below the AMD FirePro S7150 (28117).

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two cards?

A: The Instinct MI325X uses 256 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus with 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7800M uses 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI325X's memory bandwidth is more than fourteen times higher.

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The RX 7800M boosts to 2335 MHz, while the Instinct MI325X boosts to 2100 MHz. The RX 7800M also has a game clock of 2145 MHz and a base clock of 1295 MHz, compared to the MI325X's 1000 MHz base.

Q: Are both GPUs built on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes. Both use TSMC's 5 nm process node. The Instinct MI325X packs 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, while the RX 7800M contains 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die.

Q: What API support does each GPU offer?

A: The RX 7800M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Instinct MI325X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating its compute-focused design without consumer graphics API support.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share a manufacturer and a process node but diverge completely in their architectural philosophy. The Instinct MI325X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on CDNA 3.0, a compute-optimized architecture. The RX 7800M uses the Navi 32 chip built on RDNA 3.0, a graphics-oriented architecture with a focus on rasterization and ray tracing.

The transistor counts reflect this split. The MI325X integrates 153,000 million transistors across a 1017 mm² die, yielding a density of 150.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The RX 7800M integrates 28,100 million transistors across a 346 mm² die, with a density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. The MI325X is both a larger die and a denser one, which aligns with its role as a data center accelerator.

Memory architecture separates the two decisively. The MI325X uses HBM3e with 256 GB capacity, an 8192-bit bus, and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7800M uses GDDR6 with 12 GB capacity, a 192-bit bus, and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI325X's bus width is over forty times wider, and its bandwidth is an order of magnitude higher. This positions the MI325X for memory-bound workloads such as large model inference or training, while the RX 7800M targets conventional graphics memory demands.

Shader and output configurations differ fundamentally. The MI325X has 19456 shading units, 1216 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs. Its pixel rate is recorded as 0 MPixel/s, and its texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s. The RX 7800M has 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. Its pixel rate reaches 224.2 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 560.4 GTexel/s. The MI325X has no raster output stage, confirming its non-display compute role. The RX 7800M also includes 60 ray tracing cores, a feature completely absent from the MI325X's specification sheet.

Compute throughput favors the MI325X. Its FP32 performance is 81.72 TFLOPS, and its FP16 performance is also 81.72 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The RX 7800M delivers 35.87 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16, also at 1:1. The MI325X therefore offers more than twice the raw floating-point throughput, but without the graphics pipeline to rasterize a frame.

The power envelope is similarly divergent. The MI325X carries a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The RX 7800M carries a TDP of 180 W and no suggested PSU figure. The MI325X uses an OAM module slot width, while the RX 7800M is an IGP form factor. Neither card uses external power connectors.

The Verdict

The data points to two entirely different products with no overlap in benchmarks. The RX 7800M is a tested, active mobile graphics processor with a 73rd percentile ranking and a verified average score of 27883. Its nearest rivals all fall within a 0.8 percent band, indicating stable, competitive performance for its class. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and it has 60 ray tracing cores, making it suitable for modern graphics workloads.

The Instinct MI325X is an untested accelerator in this database, with zero benchmarks and no rivals. Its architecture omits ROPs and graphics APIs, and its display outputs are listed as none. It is designed for compute environments where raw FP32 and FP16 throughput, massive memory capacity, and extreme bandwidth matter. Its 81.72 TFLOPS in FP32 and FP16, combined with 256 GB of HBM3e and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth, positions it for server-side workloads.

Users who need a GPU for rasterization, ray tracing, or DirectX-based applications should select the RX 7800M. It has demonstrated performance in the 73rd percentile, and its ROP count of 96 and pixel rate of 224.2 GPixel/s confirm its display-oriented design. Users who need a compute accelerator for memory-intensive tasks should select the Instinct MI325X, provided their software stack does not require graphics output. The MI325X's lack of any display output and its N/A API support restrict it to headless compute nodes.

The RX 7800M's release date of September 10, 2024, and its active production status indicate a current product. The Instinct MI325X released on October 9, 2024, with no production status listed. Both are recent AMD offerings on the same 5 nm node, but they serve separate markets.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights only the fields where the two GPUs differ, based on the recorded data.

| Field | AMD Instinct MI325X | AMD Radeon RX 7800M |

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

| Series | None | Radeon RX 7000 series |

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | Navi 32 |

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Codename | None | Wheat Nas |

| Generation | Instinct (MIx) | Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | 28,100 million |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 346 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | 81.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1295 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 2335 MHz |

| Game Clock | None | 2145 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz, 6 Gbps effective | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 256 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3e | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 6.14 TB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 19456 | 3840 |

| TMUs | 1216 | 240 |

| ROPs | 0 | 96 |

| RT Cores | None | 60 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 224.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 560.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 35.87 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) | 35.87 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 1000 W | 180 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Suggested PSU | 1400 W | None |

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

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Production Status | None | Active |

| Release Date | 2024-10-09 | 2024-09-10 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | Polaris Mobile |

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7800M wins in every graphics-oriented category. It has ROPs, ray tracing cores, a pixel rate of 224.2 GPixel/s, and full support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its display outputs are portable-device dependent, and its 180 W TDP allows integration into mobile form factors. Its benchmark scores, particularly the Geekbench Vulkan result of 126668 and the Passmark G3D score of 17613, confirm its viability for rendering tasks. The card's 73rd percentile ranking places it above the median GPU in the database.

The Instinct MI325X wins in compute and memory throughput. Its FP32 and FP16 figures of 81.72 TFLOPS are more than double the RX 7800M's 35.87 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s exceeds the RX 7800M's 560.4 GTexel/s by a factor of more than four. Its memory bandwidth of 6.14 TB/s dwarfs the 432.0 GB/s of the RX 7800M, and its 256 GB capacity offers over twenty times the memory size. The 8192-bit bus width is unmatched in the comparison. The MI325X also uses the newer PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the RX 7800M uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

The power requirements reinforce the use-case split. The MI325X demands a 1000 W TDP and a 1400 W suggested PSU, making it a rack-mounted OAM module for data centers. The RX 7800M operates at 180 W TDP with no suggested PSU, fitting into portable devices. There is no scenario in the recorded data where one card substitutes for the other. The RX 7800M is the only option for graphics output; the MI325X is the only option for massive memory capacity and extreme bandwidth.