AMD Instinct MI325X vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

AMD Instinct MI325X vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM

The database records two accelerators with fundamentally different design goals. The AMD Instinct MI325X targets high-performance compute with a massive memory subsystem, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a far smaller footprint. Benchmark results are unavailable for both entries, so the comparison relies on recorded specifications, clock behavior, and architectural characteristics. The data shows a 50th percentile ranking for both parts against all GPUs, and no head-to-head benchmark scores exist in the database. This analysis walks through the measurable differences, interpreting what each specification means in practical terms for compute workloads, memory-bound tasks, and system integration.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No benchmark scores are recorded for either the AMD Instinct MI325X or the NVIDIA N1X 40SM in the database. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and both entries show an average benchmark score of zero. The percentile versus all GPUs is identical at 50 for both, which indicates no performance separation can be derived from recorded measurements. Without direct workload results, the comparison must rely on theoretical throughput figures and memory capabilities.

The FP32 compute rates show a clear division. The AMD Instinct MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio), while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM produces 24.02 TFLOPS in both formats. The AMD part leads by a factor of 3.4x in raw floating-point throughput, a difference that would dominate any compute-heavy benchmark if measurements existed. Texture rate follows the same pattern: the Instinct MI325X reaches 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 750.7 GTexel/s for the N1X 40SM, again a 3.4x advantage. Pixel rate inverts this relationship, with the NVIDIA part recording 93.84 GPixel/s while the AMD accelerator shows 0 MPixel/s, reflecting the absence of raster output units on the Instinct design.

Memory bandwidth magnifies the separation. The Instinct MI325X has 6.14 TB/s of bandwidth across an 8192-bit bus, while the N1X 40SM provides 273.2 GB/s over a 256-bit interface. That is a 22.5x difference in memory throughput, which would translate directly into memory-bound benchmark outcomes. Clock speeds tell a different story: the NVIDIA part boosts to 2346 MHz versus 2100 MHz for the AMD accelerator, and the base clock is 741 MHz for NVIDIA versus 1000 MHz for AMD. The higher boost clock on the N1X 40SM does not compensate for the massive differences in core count, memory width, and compute units.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI325X wins decisively in all compute throughput categories recorded in the database. Its shading unit count of 19,456 dwarfs the 5,120 shading units on the N1X 40SM. Texture mapping units also favor AMD at 1,216 versus 320. The FP32 and FP16 outputs of 81.72 TFLOPS place the Instinct MI325X in a performance class that the NVIDIA IGP cannot approach with its 24.02 TFLOPS. Memory capacity is another clear win: 256 GB of HBM3e versus 128 GB of LPDDR5X, doubling the available working set for large models or datasets.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM wins in specific areas where the AMD part has no presence. It has 40 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores, all fields that are null or absent on the Instinct MI325X. Pixel rate is 93.84 GPixel/s on NVIDIA, while AMD records zero. The N1X 40SM also has a display output (1x HDMI), whereas the Instinct MI325X has no outputs at all. The NVIDIA part is an IGP, meaning it integrates into a processor package, while the AMD accelerator is an OAM module requiring a separate socket. For workloads involving ray tracing, tensor operations, or display output, the N1X 40SM is the only viable option between the two. For any pure compute or memory-bandwidth-bound task, the Instinct MI325X dominates every recorded metric.

Architecture Differences

The two parts come from different architectural generations. AMD uses CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, part of the Instinct (MIx) generation. NVIDIA uses Blackwell 2.0 architecture on the GB20B chip, part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the die sizes diverge sharply. The Instinct MI325X has a 1017 mm² die with 153,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per square millimeter. The N1X 40SM has a 382 mm² die with unknown transistor count and no recorded density figure. The AMD chip is 2.7x larger in die area, reflecting its massively wider memory bus and compute array.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The Instinct MI325X uses HBM3e with 256 GB capacity, an 8192-bit bus, and 1500 MHz memory clock (6 Gbps effective). The N1X 40SM uses LPDDR5X with 128 GB capacity, a 256-bit bus, and 1067 MHz memory clock (8.5 Gbps effective). The AMD part achieves 6.14 TB/s bandwidth through extreme bus width, while the NVIDIA part relies on higher effective data rate per pin but far fewer pins. Power delivery also separates them: the Instinct MI325X has a 1000 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1400 W, while the N1X 40SM has unknown TDP and no suggested PSU, consistent with its IGP classification.

Feature sets highlight the design split. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM includes 40 RT cores and 160 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and matrix operations. The AMD Instinct MI325X has no RT cores and no tensor cores recorded, relying instead on raw shading throughput. Both parts report N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan APIs, indicating neither is oriented toward conventional graphics APIs. The AMD accelerator has no display outputs, while the NVIDIA part has one HDMI output. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 as the bus interface, and both have no power connectors (the AMD OAM module gets power through its socket, and the IGP draws from the host board).

FAQ

Q: Which accelerator has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X records 81.72 TFLOPS in FP32, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM records 24.02 TFLOPS. The AMD part delivers 3.4x the FP32 throughput.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The Instinct MI325X provides 6.14 TB/s from HBM3e memory across an 8192-bit bus. The N1X 40SM provides 273.2 GB/s from LPDDR5X across a 256-bit bus. The AMD part has 22.5x the bandwidth.

Q: Does the NVIDIA N1X 40SM support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the N1X 40SM includes 40 RT cores and 160 tensor cores. The AMD Instinct MI325X has no RT cores or tensor cores recorded in the database.

Q: What memory capacities are available?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X has 256 GB of HBM3e. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X. The AMD part offers double the capacity.

Q: Are these parts suitable for display output?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has one HDMI output. The AMD Instinct MI325X has no display outputs, making it unsuitable for direct display connection.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: Both the AMD Aqua Vanjaram and the NVIDIA GB20B are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The AMD die is 1017 mm², and the NVIDIA die is 382 mm².

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear separation of use cases. The AMD Instinct MI325X is the choice for compute workloads that demand maximum FP32 or FP16 throughput, massive memory capacity, and extreme bandwidth. Its 81.72 TFLOPS, 256 GB memory, and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth define a high-end accelerator for data-center-style workloads. The absence of display outputs and raster units (0 MPixel/s pixel rate, 0 ROPs) means it is not designed for graphics output or conventional rendering. The 1000 W TDP and OAM module form factor further indicate a server-oriented design.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM is the choice for integrated systems needing graphics output, ray tracing, or tensor acceleration. Its 40 RT cores, 160 tensor cores, 93.84 GPixel/s pixel rate, and single HDMI output make it a functional IGP despite its lower compute throughput. The 24.02 TFLOPS FP32 figure and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth are modest compared to the AMD part, but the N1X 40SM carries no recorded TDP, fits as an IGP, and includes features the AMD part entirely lacks. The database shows no benchmark scores for either, so selection must follow the specification profile rather than measured performance. Users with raw compute needs should pick the Instinct MI325X; users with integrated graphics and specialized cores should pick the N1X 40SM.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Instinct MI325X | NVIDIA N1X 40SM |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | GB20B |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) | 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 256 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3e | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 6.14 TB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 19456 | 5120 |

| TMUs | 1216 | 320 |

| ROPs | 0 | 40 |

| RT Cores | null | 40 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 160 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 93.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 750.7 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 24.02 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) | 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 1000 W | unknown |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | 1400 W | null |

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

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI |

| Release Date | 2024-10-09 | 2026-05-31 |

| Production Status | null | Active |