AMD Instinct MI325X vs AMD Radeon RX 9060 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no shared benchmark results between the AMD Instinct MI325X and the AMD Radeon RX 9060, so direct score comparisons are not possible. However, the recorded data for each product can be interpreted against its own nearest rivals. The Instinct MI325X has no benchmark scores listed and sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of zero. That absence of recorded data places it outside the consumer benchmarking framework entirely. The RX 9060, by contrast, has a full benchmark profile. Its average score is 16,014, and it sits at the 59th percentile among all GPUs. That percentile rank means the RX 9060 outperforms more than half of all recorded GPUs in the database, a solid mid-range placement.

Looking at the RX 9060's individual benchmark results, the highest recorded score comes from Geekbench OpenCL at 88,183. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result is 3,322, and the Geekbench Vulkan score is 39,476. The Passmark G3D score is 17,631, while the Passmark GPU Compute score is 9,919. The older DirectX API tests show lower numbers: Passmark DirectX 11 scores 182, DirectX 10 scores 104, and DirectX 12 scores 44. The Passmark DirectX 9 result is 280, and the 2D test score is 1,002. These numbers indicate the RX 9060's strongest performance appears in compute-oriented workloads, with the OpenCL result being particularly dominant relative to its other recorded scores.

Against its nearest rivals, the RX 9060's average score of 16,014 is 0.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which averages 16,129. That margin is negligible in real-world terms. The RX 9060 edges out the AMD Radeon R9 370X by 1%, with that card averaging 15,862. It also leads the AMD Radeon RX 7700 by 1%, which averages 15,852. The largest advantage among the listed rivals is against the AMD Radeon Pro W5500, where the RX 9060 holds a 2.1% lead, as that card averages 15,679. These deltas are small, placing the RX 9060 in a tightly contested performance band.

The Instinct MI325X has no nearest rivals listed and no benchmark entries, so no head-to-head wins can be quantified for it. Its 50th percentile rank is a placeholder derived from the lack of recorded data, not a performance measurement. The RX 9060, with its 59th percentile and active benchmark results, clearly has the only usable performance profile in this comparison.

The Verdict

The data supports a simple split: the Radeon RX 9060 is the only one of these two GPUs with any recorded benchmark results, so any performance-based selection must favor it. Its 59th percentile rank and average score of 16,014 place it in a competitive mid-range position, trading blows with the RTX 3060 Ti and beating the R9 370X, RX 7700, and Pro W5500 by slim margins. The Instinct MI325X, despite its massive memory capacity and compute specifications, has zero recorded benchmarks and a 50th percentile that reflects no data rather than measured performance.

For a user selecting a GPU for consumer workloads, gaming, or general compute tasks, the RX 9060 is the only option with evidence of real-world capability. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support, Vulkan 1.4, and display outputs make it a functional graphics card. The Instinct MI325X offers no display outputs, no consumer API support, and no benchmark data. It is an accelerator module, not a graphics card, and the database confirms this with a 1000 W TDP and OAM form factor.

For compute-heavy data center workloads, the MI325X's specifications suggest capability, but the absence of benchmark scores means the database cannot confirm any performance advantage. The verdict from the recorded data is clear: the RX 9060 is the only chip with proven, measurable performance. The MI325X remains an unverified entity in this comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different AMD architecture families. The Instinct MI325X uses CDNA 3.0, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC with the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The Radeon RX 9060 uses RDNA 4.0, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with the Navi 44 chip and the codename Strix Point. The process node difference is one nanometer, which is minor but relevant for transistor density. The MI325X packs 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, giving a density of 150.4 million transistors per mm². The RX 9060 has 29,700 million transistors on a 199 mm² die, with a density of 149.2 million per mm². The densities are nearly identical, but the MI325X's die is over five times larger.

The MI325X uses HBM3e memory with 256 GB capacity on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 6.14 TB/s of bandwidth. The RX 9060 uses GDDR6 with 8 GB capacity on a 128-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s. The memory bandwidth difference is enormous, favoring the MI325X by a factor of more than twenty. The RX 9060 has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The MI325X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 TMUs, but its ROP count is zero and its pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s. That makes sense for a compute accelerator with no display output. The RX 9060 has 28 ray tracing cores and a pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s. The MI325X lists no ray tracing cores.

The RX 9060 has a base clock of 1700 MHz, a boost clock of 2990 MHz, and a game clock of 2400 MHz. Its memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate. The MI325X has a base clock of 1000 MHz, a boost clock of 2100 MHz, and a memory clock of 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective. The RX 9060's boost clock is nearly 900 MHz higher. In terms of compute throughput, the MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 and the same FP16 figure at a 1:1 ratio. The RX 9060 delivers 21.43 TFLOPS of FP32 and 21.43 TFLOPS of FP16. The MI325X has roughly four times the raw FP32 throughput. Its texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 334.9 GTexel/s for the RX 9060.

The power envelopes differ drastically. The MI325X has a TDP of 1000 W and requires a 1400 W suggested PSU, using no power connectors because it is an OAM module. The RX 9060 has a TDP of 132 W with a 300 W suggested PSU and a single 8-pin connector. The RX 9060 is a dual-slot card with PCIe 5.0 x16 interface and display outputs including 1x HDMI 2.1b and 2x DisplayPort 2.1a. The MI325X has no display outputs. The RX 9060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI325X lists N/A for all consumer APIs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32, which is approximately four times the 21.43 TFLOPS of the AMD Radeon RX 9060.

Q: What memory configurations do the two cards use?

A: The MI325X uses 256 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 9060 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the Instinct MI325X support display outputs?

A: No, the MI325X has no display outputs. The RX 9060 has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 2x DisplayPort 2.1a outputs.

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The RX 9060 boosts to 2990 MHz, while the MI325X boosts to 2100 MHz. The RX 9060 also has a higher base clock at 1700 MHz versus 1000 MHz.

Q: What is the power requirement difference?

A: The MI325X has a TDP of 1000 W with a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The RX 9060 has a TDP of 132 W with a suggested PSU of 300 W.

Q: Which GPU has ray tracing hardware?

A: The RX 9060 includes 28 ray tracing cores. The MI325X lists no ray tracing cores in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 9060 wins in every category where recorded data exists. Benchmark results show it performing at a 59th percentile rank with an average score of 16,014. It has consumer API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it usable for gaming and general graphics workloads. Its 132 W TDP and single 8-pin power connector make it practical for a standard desktop build. The RX 9060 also has display outputs, so it can drive monitors directly. Its boost clock of 2990 MHz and game clock of 2400 MHz indicate strong frequency behavior for consumer tasks.

The MI325X wins on raw specification sheets. Its 256 GB HBM3e memory and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth dwarf the RX 9060's 8 GB GDDR6 and 288.0 GB/s. Its FP32 throughput of 81.72 TFLOPS is four times higher. Its 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die represent a server-class silicon investment. The MI325X also has a higher transistor density at 150.4M per mm², though barely above the RX 9060's 149.2M per mm². The MI325X is built for data center compute acceleration, not consumer graphics. The 1000 W TDP and OAM module form factor confirm that positioning.

For a builder assembling a gaming PC or workstation with display needs, the RX 9060 is the clear choice based on recorded data. For a hyperscale compute cluster requiring massive memory bandwidth and FP32 throughput, the MI325X's specifications point in that direction, though the database contains no benchmark results to validate its real-world performance.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable field. The MI325X uses a 5 nm process, the RX 9060 uses 4 nm. The MI325X has 153,000 million transistors, the RX 9060 has 29,700 million. Die size is 1017 mm² for the MI325X versus 199 mm² for the RX 9060. Transistor density is 150.4M per mm² versus 149.2M per mm². The MI325X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 TMUs, while the RX 9060 has 1,792 shading units and 112 TMUs. The MI325X has zero ROPs and zero pixel rate, while the RX 9060 has 64 ROPs and a 191.4 GPixel/s pixel rate. The RX 9060 has 28 ray tracing cores, the MI325X has none.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The MI325X runs at 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost. The RX 9060 runs at 1700 MHz base, 2400 MHz game, and 2990 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective for the MI325X versus 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective for the RX 9060. Memory capacity is 256 GB of HBM3e versus 8 GB of GDDR6. Bus width is 8192 bits versus 128 bits. Bandwidth is 6.14 TB/s versus 288.0 GB/s. FP32 performance is 81.72 TFLOPS versus 21.43 TFLOPS, with the same FP16 figures for both. Texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 334.9 GTexel/s.

Power specifications diverge completely. The MI325X has a 1000 W TDP, no power connectors, and a 1400 W suggested PSU. The RX 9060 has a 132 W TDP, one 8-pin connector, and a 300 W suggested PSU. The MI325X is an OAM module, the RX 9060 is dual-slot. The MI325X has no display outputs, the RX 9060 has one HDMI 2.1b and two DisplayPort 2.1a outputs. The MI325X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The RX 9060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI325X was released on 2024-10-09, the RX 9060 on 2025-08-04. The RX 9060 has an active production status, while the MI325X has none listed.