AMD Instinct MI325X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no overlapping benchmark results for the AMD Instinct MI325X and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile. The MI325X has no recorded benchmark entries, while the RTX 4050 Mobile has nine results across Geekbench and Passmark suites. Consequently, a direct score comparison is impossible. The RTX 4050 Mobile's average benchmark score is 19049, placing it in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals, all within a narrow band, include the AMD Radeon RX 6600 (average score 19036, delta 0.1%), the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (average score 19030, delta 0.1%), the NVIDIA Tesla K20m (average score 19089, delta -0.2%), and the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation (average score 18954, delta 0.5%). The data shows that the RTX 4050 Mobile sits just 0.2% behind the Tesla K20m, its closest competitor, and 0.5% ahead of the RTX 2000 Ada Generation.

The MI325X, by contrast, holds a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs, but this figure is derived from an average benchmark score of zero, reflecting the absence of any submitted test data. The head-to-head benchmark matrix is empty, and the win tally for both products stands at zero. Without recorded scores, any quantitative comparison of compute performance between the two accelerators is unsupported by the available facts. The RTX 4050 Mobile's strongest individual result is its Geekbench Vulkan score of 75235, which slightly exceeds its OpenCL score of 74748. Its Passmark G3D score of 14423 dwarfs its compute score of 5947, indicating a substantial gap between graphics and general-purpose compute workloads in that suite.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge sharply at the architectural level. The MI325X uses AMD's CDNA 3.0 architecture, built around the Aqua Vanjaram chip, while the RTX 4050 Mobile employs NVIDIA's Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD107 chip. Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the transistor counts reveal a massive scale difference. The MI325X integrates 153,000 million transistors on a die of 1017 mm², yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The RTX 4050 Mobile contains 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, with a density of 118.9 million per mm². The MI325X's die is over six times larger by area and holds eight times more transistors.

Memory architecture is another fundamental differentiator. The MI325X uses HBM3e memory with a 8192-bit bus width, delivering a bandwidth of 6.14 TB/s. The RTX 4050 Mobile uses GDDR6 with a 96-bit bus, providing 192.0 GB/s. The MI325X's memory bandwidth is roughly 32 times higher. The RTX 4050 Mobile includes dedicated ray tracing cores (20) and tensor cores (80), features that the MI325X does not list. The MI325X, as a compute-focused accelerator, exposes no graphics APIs: DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan are all marked N/A. The RTX 4050 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The clock behavior also differs. The MI325X runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost, while the RTX 4050 Mobile operates at a 1455 MHz base and 1755 MHz boost. The MI325X's memory clock is listed at 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective transfer, whereas the RTX 4050 Mobile's memory runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective. The MI325X has no display outputs, while the RTX 4050 Mobile's outputs are described as portable device dependent. Power delivery is likewise distinct: the MI325X is an OAM module with no power connectors and no suggested PSU, while the RTX 4050 Mobile is an IGP with no connectors and no suggested PSU listed.

Where Each One Wins

The MI325X wins decisively in raw compute scale. Its shading unit count of 19456 is nearly eight times the RTX 4050 Mobile's 2560. Texture mapping units number 1216 versus 80. The MI325X's FP32 throughput of 81.72 TFLOPS is over nine times the RTX 4050 Mobile's 8.986 TFLOPS, and its FP16 figure matches at 81.72 TFLOPS, delivered at a 1:1 ratio. The RTX 4050 Mobile achieves 8.986 TFLOPS in FP16, also at 1:1. Texture rate for the MI325X is 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 140.4 GTexel/s for the RTX 4050 Mobile. The MI325X records a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s due to its lack of ROPs, while the RTX 4050 Mobile delivers 84.24 GPixel/s with 48 ROPs.

The RTX 4050 Mobile wins in areas the MI325X does not cover. Its ray tracing and tensor core support enables features absent from the MI325X's specification sheet. Its full graphics API stack, including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, makes it suitable for rendering workloads that the MI325X cannot handle. The RTX 4050 Mobile also holds the advantage in power efficiency: its TDP of 50 W is 20 times lower than the MI325X's 1000 W, though the MI325X's performance per watt cannot be calculated without benchmark scores. The RTX 4050 Mobile has an active production status, while the MI325X's production status is not listed.

The release timeline favors the MI325X as a newer product. Its release date is 2024-10-09, while the RTX 4050 Mobile launched on 2023-01-02. The MI325X's predecessor is the Radeon Instinct, and the RTX 4050 Mobile's predecessor is the GeForce 30 Mobile, with the GeForce 50 Mobile listed as its successor. The bus interface differs as well: the MI325X uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RTX 4050 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

Specification Differences

The two products differ in nearly every measurable specification. The MI325X has no series designation, while the RTX 4050 Mobile belongs to the GeForce 40-series. The MI325X's chip is Aqua Vanjaram, the RTX 4050 Mobile's is AD107. Architecture splits as CDNA 3.0 versus Ada Lovelace. Generation differs: Instinct (MIx) versus GeForce 40 Mobile.

Process node is identical at 5 nm, and both use TSMC as the foundry. Transistor count is 153,000 million versus 18,900 million. Die size is 1017 mm² versus 159 mm². Transistor density is 150.4M per mm² versus 118.9M per mm². Base clock is 1000 MHz versus 1455 MHz. Boost clock is 2100 MHz versus 1755 MHz. Memory clock is 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). Memory size is 256 GB versus 6 GB. Memory type is HBM3e versus GDDR6. Bus width is 8192 bit versus 96 bit. Bandwidth is 6.14 TB/s versus 192.0 GB/s.

Shading units are 19456 versus 2560. TMUs are 1216 versus 80. ROPs are 0 versus 48. The MI325X lists no RT cores or tensor cores; the RTX 4050 Mobile has 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s versus 84.24 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 140.4 GTexel/s. FP32 is 81.72 TFLOPS versus 8.986 TFLOPS. FP16 is 81.72 TFLOPS versus 8.986 TFLOPS. TDP is 1000 W versus 50 W. Slot width is OAM Module versus IGP. Power connectors are none for both. Suggested PSU is 1400 W for the MI325X, not listed for the RTX 4050 Mobile.

Bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are none versus portable device dependent. DirectX support is N/A versus 12 Ultimate (12_2). OpenGL is N/A versus 4.6. Vulkan is N/A versus 1.4. Release dates are 2024-10-09 versus 2023-01-02. Production status is not specified for the MI325X, active for the RTX 4050 Mobile. The MI325X's predecessor is Radeon Instinct; the RTX 4050 Mobile's is GeForce 30 Mobile, with GeForce 50 Mobile as successor. Neither product has a launch MSRP listed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is over nine times the 8.986 TFLOPS of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: No. The MI325X lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A, indicating no graphics API support. The RTX 4050 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

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

A: The MI325X provides 6.14 TB/s of bandwidth via 256 GB of HBM3e on a 8192-bit bus. The RTX 4050 Mobile provides 192.0 GB/s via 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus. The MI325X's bandwidth is roughly 32 times higher.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking in the database?

A: The RTX 4050 Mobile ranks in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs, while the MI325X ranks in the 50th percentile. The MI325X's ranking is based on an average benchmark score of zero due to no recorded test results.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores available for the MI325X?

A: No. The database lists no benchmarks for the MI325X. The RTX 4050 Mobile has nine recorded scores, including a Geekbench Vulkan score of 75235 and a Passmark G3D score of 14423.

Q: What are the power consumption figures for each GPU?

A: The MI325X has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The RTX 4050 Mobile has a TDP of 50 W and no suggested PSU listed. Both use no external power connectors.