AMD Instinct MI325X vs NVIDIA H200 NVL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Instinct MI325X versus the NVIDIA H200 NVL. The AMD Instinct MI325X has no recorded benchmark scores, averaging zero across all tests, while the NVIDIA H200 NVL has one recorded result in Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 334,891. This places the H200 NVL in the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database, whereas the MI325X sits at the 50th percentile with no measured performance data.

Without direct comparative runs, the only quantitative reference points come from the H200 NVL's nearest rivals. The H200 NVL trails the NVIDIA B200 by 3.1%, with the B200 scoring 345,482. It sits 5.3% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI300X, which scored 317,994. The H200 NVL falls 9.4% short of the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC, which scored 369,831, but it leads the NVIDIA L40S by 13.2%, with the L40S scoring 295,763.

The MI325X's lack of benchmark data means its real-world standing cannot be quantified from the database. Its theoretical specifications, however, indicate substantial raw compute potential that would likely place it in a competitive tier, but the absence of measured results prevents any definitive head-to-head conclusion.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI325X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on the CDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. It contains 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 150.4 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA H200 NVL uses the GH100 chip built on the Hopper architecture, also fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. It contains 80,000 million transistors on a 814 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 98.3 million per square millimeter.

The MI325X packs 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs, with a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s and a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s. The H200 NVL has 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 42.84 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 942.5 GTexel/s. The H200 NVL includes 528 tensor cores, while the MI325X lists no tensor core count.

Clock speeds differ notably. The MI325X runs at a 1000 MHz base clock and boosts to 2100 MHz, while the H200 NVL runs at a 1365 MHz base and boosts to 1785 MHz. Memory clocks also differ: the MI325X uses 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective, and the H200 NVL uses 1593 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective.

Memory capacity and bandwidth strongly favor the MI325X. It offers 256 GB of HBM3e across an 8192-bit bus, delivering 6.14 TB/s of bandwidth. The H200 NVL provides 141 GB of HBM3e across a 6144-bit bus, delivering 4.89 TB/s. The MI325X's memory bus is 33% wider, and its capacity is roughly 82% larger.

Compute throughput separates the two as well. The MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 and 81.72 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 1:1 ratio. The H200 NVL delivers 60.32 TFLOPS of FP32 and 120.6 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. Thus, the MI325X leads FP32 by about 35%, but the H200 NVL leads FP16 by about 48% due to its tensor core acceleration.

Power envelopes differ substantially. The MI325X has a TDP of 1000 W with a suggested PSU of 1400 W, while the H200 NVL has a TDP of 600 W with a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The MI325X uses an OAM module slot width with no power connectors, whereas the H200 NVL uses a dual-slot form factor with an 8-pin EPS connector. The H200 NVL measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height; the MI325X has no recorded dimensions.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory capacity?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X has 256 GB of HBM3e, while the NVIDIA H200 NVL has 141 GB of HBM3e. The MI325X offers roughly 82% more capacity.

Q: Which GPU provides higher memory bandwidth?

A: The MI325X delivers 6.14 TB/s across an 8192-bit bus, and the H200 NVL delivers 4.89 TB/s across a 6144-bit bus. The MI325X leads by approximately 26% in bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute?

A: The MI325X achieves 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32, while the H200 NVL achieves 60.32 TFLOPS. The MI325X is about 35% ahead in single-precision throughput.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP16 compute?

A: The H200 NVL achieves 120.6 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, while the MI325X achieves 81.72 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The H200 NVL is about 48% ahead in half-precision throughput.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The MI325X has a TDP of 1000 W with a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The H200 NVL has a TDP of 600 W with a suggested PSU of 1000 W.

Q: Which GPU has a higher benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The H200 NVL ranks in the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database with an average benchmark score of 334,891. The MI325X ranks in the 50th percentile with no recorded benchmark scores.

The Verdict

The database shows a clear split in measured versus theoretical performance. The NVIDIA H200 NVL has verified benchmark results placing it in the top percentile of all GPUs, with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 334,891. It outperforms the AMD Instinct MI300X by 5.3% and the NVIDIA L40S by 13.2%, while trailing the NVIDIA B200 by 3.1% and the B300 SXM6 AC by 9.4%. The MI325X has no recorded benchmark scores, so its real-world standing cannot be confirmed from the database.

For workloads relying on FP32 throughput, the MI325X's 81.72 TFLOPS exceeds the H200 NVL's 60.32 TFLOPS by roughly 35%. For workloads relying on FP16 throughput, the H200 NVL's 120.6 TFLOPS exceeds the MI325X's 81.72 TFLOPS by roughly 48%. Memory-bound applications favor the MI325X with its 256 GB capacity and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth, both significantly higher than the H200 NVL's 141 GB and 4.89 TB/s.

Power efficiency favors the H200 NVL. At 600 W TDP, it delivers its FP32 and FP16 performance with a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The MI325X requires 1000 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The H200 NVL also fits a dual-slot form factor with an 8-pin EPS connector, while the MI325X uses an OAM module with no power connectors, which may influence system integration choices.

The H200 NVL is the only one of the two with measured data, and it ranks at the 100th percentile. Buyers seeking validated performance and proven software support should favor the H200 NVL. Buyers prioritizing maximum memory capacity and raw FP32 throughput, with the associated power and form factor requirements, should consider the MI325X based on its specifications.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI325X | NVIDIA H200 NVL |

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

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | GH100 |

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Hopper |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | 80,000 million |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 814 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | 98.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1365 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 1785 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz, 6 Gbps effective | 1593 MHz, 6.4 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 256 GB | 141 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3e | HBM3e |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 6144 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 6.14 TB/s | 4.89 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 19,456 | 16,896 |

| TMUs | 1,216 | 528 |

| ROPs | 0 | 24 |

| Tensor Cores | Not listed | 528 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 42.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 942.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 81.72 TFLOPS | 60.32 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) | 120.6 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 1000 W | 600 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 8-pin EPS |

| Suggested PSU | 1400 W | 1000 W |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 267 mm length, 111 mm height |

| Release Date | 2024-10-09 | 2024-11-17 |

| Production Status | Not listed | Active |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI325X wins on memory capacity, memory bandwidth, FP32 compute, transistor count, die size, and shading unit count. Its 256 GB memory and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth suit large-scale model training or inference workloads where data residency is critical. Its 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 makes it the stronger choice for single-precision compute tasks. Its 1,216 TMUs and 2,553.6 GTexel/s texture rate indicate heavy texture throughput potential, though its zero ROPs and 0 MPixel/s pixel rate limit traditional rasterization capabilities.

The NVIDIA H200 NVL wins on FP16 compute, tensor core availability, pixel rate, power efficiency, and measured benchmark performance. Its 120.6 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, enabled by 528 tensor cores, positions it for mixed-precision AI workloads. Its 42.84 GPixel/s pixel rate and 24 ROPs provide actual pixel processing capability. At 600 W TDP, it delivers its performance with a 400 W lower power draw and a 400 W lower suggested PSU. Its 100th percentile ranking in the database, backed by a Geekbench OpenCL score of 334,891, gives it verified performance standing. Its dual-slot form factor and 8-pin EPS connector make it more adaptable to standard server configurations than the MI325X's OAM module.

The MI325X also leads in raw hardware scale, with 153,000 million transistors versus 80,000 million and a 1017 mm² die versus 814 mm². Its 19,456 shading units exceed the H200 NVL's 16,896. The H200 NVL counters with a higher base clock of 1365 MHz versus 1000 MHz, though the MI325X boosts higher at 2100 MHz versus 1785 MHz.

Workloads favoring the MI325X include those that need maximum memory footprint, wide memory buses, or sustained FP32 throughput. Workloads favoring the H200 NVL include those that need FP16 tensor performance, validated benchmark results, lower power draw, or standard dual-slot PCIe integration. The absence of MI325X benchmark data means its wins are purely specification-based, while the H200 NVL's wins include demonstrated database scores.