AMD Instinct MI325X vs AMD Radeon RX 9070 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no overlapping benchmark records for the AMD Instinct MI325X and the AMD Radeon RX 9070. The Instinct MI325X has no recorded benchmark scores, while the Radeon RX 9070 has ten entries across 3DMark, Geekbench, and Passmark suites. Consequently, direct numerical comparisons between these two accelerators are impossible from the recorded data.

The Radeon RX 9070’s recorded scores establish its position within the broader GPU landscape. Its strongest result appears in Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 131,539 points, far exceeding its Vulkan score of 58,705 points. In Passmark tests, the RX 9070 posts a G3D score of 25,381 and a GPU compute score of 14,737. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test yields 6,290 points. These results place the RX 9070 at the 69th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 23,877.

For the Instinct MI325X, the percentile ranking is 50, and its average benchmark score is 0, reflecting the absence of any measured workloads. The nearest rivals list for the RX 9070 provides context for its performance level. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z sits 0.6% above with an average score of 23,736, while the AMD Radeon RX 6800S trails by 0.8% at 24,063. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile leads by 1.1% at 23,628, and the RTX 2080 SUPER falls 1.2% behind at 24,170. These deltas indicate that the RX 9070 clusters tightly with a group of established gaming GPUs, all within roughly a single percentage point of each other.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon RX 9070 wins every measurable category, simply because it is the only one of the two with recorded benchmark data. Its wins span multiple API and workload types. In Geekbench, the OpenCL score of 131,539 more than doubles the Vulkan score of 58,705, suggesting the RX 9070’s compute performance is more consistently realized through the OpenCL path in that test. Passmark results show a G3D score of 25,381 versus a GPU compute score of 14,737, indicating a substantial gap between graphics-centric and compute-centric workloads on the same card.

The Instinct MI325X wins no benchmarks in the database. Its lack of any scores means the data cannot confirm any performance advantage, despite its hardware specifications pointing toward a very different intended workload. The MI325X targets acceleration rather than display output, with no display outputs, no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API support, and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The RX 9070, by contrast, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and has a pixel rate of 322.6 GPixel/s.

For the use-case split, the RX 9070 clearly serves interactive graphics and gaming. Its API support, display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1a), and dual-slot form factor align with consumer graphics cards. The MI325X, with its OAM Module slot width, no power connectors, and no display outputs, serves a server or data-center role where rendering to a screen is irrelevant. Its 256 GB of HBM3e memory and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth vastly exceed the RX 9070’s 16 GB GDDR6 and 644.6 GB/s, indicating a focus on large-scale data processing rather than real-time graphics.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9070 has an average benchmark score of 23,877 across ten tests. The AMD Instinct MI325X has no benchmark scores and an average of 0.

Q: What is the RX 9070’s percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The RX 9070 sits at the 69th percentile. The MI325X is at the 50th percentile, but with no recorded scores, that percentile carries no measured performance weight.

Q: How close is the RX 9070 to its nearest rivals?

A: The closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z, which is 0.6% ahead at 23,736. The AMD Radeon RX 6800S is 0.8% behind at 24,063, the RTX 3080 Mobile is 1.1% ahead at 23,628, and the RTX 2080 SUPER is 1.2% behind at 24,170.

Q: Does the MI325X support any graphics APIs?

A: No. The MI325X lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A. The RX 9070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

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

A: The MI325X uses 256 GB of HBM3e with an 8192-bit bus and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 9070 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 with a 256-bit bus and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has display outputs?

A: Only the RX 9070 has display outputs, with 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1a. The MI325X has no outputs.

Specification Differences

The two AMD accelerators diverge sharply across nearly every specification. The MI325X uses a 5 nm process node from TSMC, while the RX 9070 uses a 4 nm node from the same foundry. Transistor counts differ by an order of magnitude: 153,000 million for the MI325X versus 53,900 million for the RX 9070. Die size also contrasts heavily, with the MI325X at 1017 mm² and the RX 9070 at 357 mm². Transistor density is nearly identical, at 150.4M / mm² for the MI325X and 151.0M / mm² for the RX 9070.

Clock speeds favor the RX 9070. Its base clock is 1330 MHz and boost is 2520 MHz, with a game clock of 2070 MHz. The MI325X has a lower base of 1000 MHz and a boost of 2100 MHz, with no game clock. Memory speeds differ as well: the MI325X’s memory runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the RX 9070’s memory runs at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective).

Shading units heavily favor the MI325X at 19,456 versus the RX 9070’s 3,584. Texture mapping units are 1,216 against 224. Raster operation units are 0 for the MI325X and 128 for the RX 9070. The RX 9070 has 56 ray-tracing cores; the MI325X lists no RT cores. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for the MI325X and 322.6 GPixel/s for the RX 9070. Texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s for the MI325X and 564.5 GTexel/s for the RX 9070. FP32 and FP16 throughput are both 81.72 TFLOPS for the MI325X and 36.13 TFLOPS for the RX 9070.

Power requirements differ substantially. The MI325X has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W, while the RX 9070 has a TDP of 220 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W. Slot width is OAM Module for the MI325X and Dual-slot for the RX 9070. Power connectors are none for the MI325X and 2x 8-pin for the RX 9070.

Architecture Differences

The MI325X uses CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, part of the Instinct (MIx) generation. The RX 9070 uses RDNA 4.0 architecture on the Navi 48 chip, part of the Navi IV (RX 9000) generation. These architectures target different domains: CDNA is compute-oriented, while RDNA is graphics-oriented.

The MI325X has no display outputs and no graphics API support, confirming its role as a compute accelerator. The RX 9070 includes full graphics API support, display outputs, and ray-tracing cores, confirming its role as a consumer graphics card. The MI325X’s memory subsystem, with 256 GB of HBM3e and an 8192-bit bus, is designed for massive data sets, whereas the RX 9070’s 16 GB GDDR6 with a 256-bit bus serves real-time rendering.

The MI325X lacks a production status, while the RX 9070 is marked Active. Release dates differ: the MI325X launched on October 9, 2024, and the RX 9070 launched on March 5, 2025. The MI325X lists its predecessor as Radeon Instinct, while the RX 9070 lists Navi III. Neither has a listed successor. The RX 9070 has a launch MSRP of 549 USD; the MI325X has no launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The recorded data separates these two AMD products into distinct roles. The Radeon RX 9070 is a measured, active consumer GPU with ten benchmark scores, a 69th percentile ranking, and an average score of 23,877. Its nearest rivals cluster within 1.2%, indicating solid mid-to-high-range performance for gaming and graphics workloads. The Instinct MI325X has no benchmark scores, no display outputs, no graphics API support, and a 1000 W TDP, marking it as a data-center compute accelerator for workloads that do not require rendering.

Who should pick which depends strictly on the data. For any workload involving a monitor, graphics APIs, or ray tracing, the RX 9070 is the only viable choice, as the MI325X cannot output an image or run standard graphics APIs. For workloads requiring extreme memory capacity (256 GB) and bandwidth (6.14 TB/s), the MI325X is the only option, as the RX 9070 offers 16 GB and 644.6 GB/s. The RX 9070’s 220 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU also make it far more accessible for standard desktop systems, while the MI325X’s 1000 W TDP and 1400 W suggested PSU demand a server-class platform.

The database shows no head-to-head benchmarks, so the verdict relies on specification differences and the RX 9070’s measured scores. The RX 9070 wins every recorded test, but that is a function of data availability, not necessarily architectural superiority. The MI325X’s FP32 throughput of 81.72 TFLOPS more than doubles the RX 9070’s 36.13 TFLOPS, and its texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s dwarfs the RX 9070’s 564.5 GTexel/s. These numbers indicate the MI325X would likely dominate compute-heavy benchmarks if such tests were recorded. The RX 9070 counters with a higher boost clock (2520 MHz versus 2100 MHz) and a substantially higher pixel rate (322.6 GPixel/s versus 0 MPixel/s), confirming its graphics focus. In short, the RX 9070 is the measured performer for interactive use, while the MI325X is the specification-heavy accelerator for memory-bound and compute-bound tasks.