AMD Instinct MI325X vs NVIDIA N1X 48SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the AMD Instinct MI325X and the NVIDIA N1X 48SM shows no direct head-to-head benchmark results. The database contains no win counts for either part, and the average benchmark score for each is zero. Both devices sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs, which indicates a neutral position in the overall distribution rather than a demonstrated performance edge.

What the data does provide is a clear specification-level comparison that can be used to project relative compute capabilities. The AMD Instinct MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM delivers 28.83 TFLOPS. That places the AMD part approximately 2.83 times ahead in raw FP32 throughput. The same ratio applies to FP16, where both parts show a 1:1 conversion rate from their FP32 figures.

Texture processing follows a similar pattern. The Instinct MI325X reaches 2,553.6 GTexel/s, compared to 900.9 GTexel/s for the N1X 48SM. That is a 2.83 times advantage for AMD. The pixel rate tells a different story entirely. The MI325X reports 0 MPixel/s with zero ROPs, while the N1X 48SM has 48 ROPs and a pixel rate of 112.6 GPixel/s. For any workload that relies on rasterization output, the NVIDIA part holds the only recorded capability.

Memory bandwidth heavily favors the AMD accelerator. The MI325X has 6.14 TB/s of bandwidth, while the N1X 48SM has 273.2 GB/s. That is a 22.5 times difference. The MI325X also carries 256 GB of HBM3e memory across an 8192-bit bus, whereas the N1X 48SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X across a 256-bit bus. The memory type and bus width differences explain the bandwidth gap.

Clock behavior also differs meaningfully. The AMD chip runs at a 1000 MHz base clock with a 2100 MHz boost. The NVIDIA chip runs at a 741 MHz base clock with a 2346 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part has a higher boost clock by 246 MHz, but the AMD part starts from a higher base frequency. Given the AMD part’s much larger shading unit count, the clock advantage for NVIDIA does not close the compute gap.

The Verdict

The data shows two devices built for different purposes. The AMD Instinct MI325X is a data center accelerator with no display outputs, a 1000 W TDP, and an OAM module slot width. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM is an integrated graphics processor with a single HDMI output and an IGP slot width. Neither part lists a launch MSRP, so no cost comparison is possible from the database.

For compute-heavy tasks such as large model inference or scientific simulation, the MI325X is the clear choice based on FP32 throughput, FP16 throughput, texture rate, and memory bandwidth. The 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 figure is more than enough to handle workloads that would strain the N1X 48SM’s 28.83 TFLOPS. The 256 GB memory capacity also doubles what the NVIDIA part offers, which matters for datasets that exceed 128 GB.

For tasks that require display output or rasterization, the N1X 48SM is the only option with recorded capability. The MI325X has zero ROPs and no display outputs, so it cannot drive a monitor or perform pixel-based rendering. The N1X 48SM’s 48 ROPs and 112.6 GPixel/s pixel rate confirm that it handles those operations.

The production status field lists the N1X 48SM as Active, while the MI325X has no production status recorded. The release dates show the MI325X from 2024-10-09 and the N1X 48SM from 2026-05-31. The database does not include benchmark scores for either, so real-world application performance remains unmeasured.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI325X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on CDNA 3.0 architecture. It is fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die. The transistor density is 150.4M per mm². This is a dedicated accelerator design with 19,456 shading units, 1,216 TMUs, and zero ROPs. It has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores recorded in the database.

The NVIDIA N1X 48SM uses the GB20B chip built on Blackwell 2.0 architecture. It is also fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process, but the transistor count is listed as unknown. The die size is 382 mm². The part has 6,144 shading units, 384 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. It includes 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores, which the AMD part does not list.

The process node is the same for both: 5 nm from TSMC. The die size difference is substantial, with the AMD chip at 2.66 times the area of the NVIDIA chip. The transistor count for the NVIDIA part is unknown, so no density comparison is possible.

Memory architecture diverges completely. The MI325X uses HBM3e with a 8192-bit bus and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The N1X 48SM uses LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock also differs: the AMD part runs at 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective, while the NVIDIA part runs at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective.

The power delivery differs as well. The MI325X has a 1000 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The N1X 48SM has an unknown TDP and no suggested PSU. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 as the bus interface. The MI325X has no power connectors listed, while the N1X 48SM also has none, consistent with an IGP.

API support is listed as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan on both parts. Neither part reports game clocks or dimensions. The MI325X lists its predecessor as Radeon Instinct, while the N1X 48SM has no predecessor recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32, compared to 28.83 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA N1X 48SM. That is a 2.83 times advantage for AMD.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X has 6.14 TB/s of bandwidth from HBM3e memory, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM has 273.2 GB/s from LPDDR5X. The AMD part leads by 22.5 times.

Q: Can either GPU output video to a display?

A: Only the NVIDIA N1X 48SM has display outputs, listed as 1x HDMI. The AMD Instinct MI325X has no display outputs recorded.

Q: What is the process node for both chips?

A: Both the AMD Instinct MI325X and the NVIDIA N1X 48SM are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process.

Q: How many ray tracing cores does each GPU have?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has 48 ray tracing cores. The AMD Instinct MI325X has no ray tracing cores listed in the database.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM boosts to 2346 MHz, while the AMD Instinct MI325X boosts to 2100 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a 246 MHz higher boost clock.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI325X wins in every compute-oriented metric recorded. Its FP32 throughput of 81.72 TFLOPS is 2.83 times that of the NVIDIA part. Its FP16 throughput matches the same ratio at 81.72 TFLOPS versus 28.83 TFLOPS. Texture rate favors AMD at 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 900.9 GTexel/s. Memory capacity favors AMD at 256 GB versus 128 GB. Memory bandwidth favors AMD at 6.14 TB/s versus 273.2 GB/s. The shading unit count favors AMD at 19,456 versus 6,144. The TMU count favors AMD at 1,216 versus 384.

The NVIDIA N1X 48SM wins in rasterization and display-related metrics. Its pixel rate of 112.6 GPixel/s is the only recorded pixel throughput, since the AMD part reports 0 MPixel/s. The N1X 48SM has 48 ROPs, while the MI325X has zero. The NVIDIA part has a single HDMI output, which gives it the only display capability. It also has 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores, features the AMD part does not list.

Clock speeds split the wins. The NVIDIA part has the higher boost clock at 2346 MHz versus 2100 MHz. The AMD part has the higher base clock at 1000 MHz versus 741 MHz. The memory clock differs by design: the AMD part runs at 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective, while the NVIDIA part runs at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, giving NVIDIA a higher effective per-pin rate.

The die size favors AMD in terms of area at 1017 mm² versus 382 mm². The transistor count favors AMD as well, with 153,000 million transistors recorded versus an unknown figure for NVIDIA. The bus interface is the same for both, PCIe 5.0 x16.

Specification Differences

The AMD Instinct MI325X and NVIDIA N1X 48SM differ across nearly every recorded specification. The chip names differ: Aqua Vanjaram for AMD versus GB20B for NVIDIA. The architectures differ: CDNA 3.0 versus Blackwell 2.0. The generations differ: Instinct (MIx) versus Blackwell IGP (N1x).

The process node is identical at 5 nm from TSMC. The transistor count differs: 153,000 million for AMD versus unknown for NVIDIA. The die size differs: 1017 mm² for AMD versus 382 mm² for NVIDIA. The transistor density is 150.4M per mm² for AMD, with no figure for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds differ in base, boost, and memory. AMD runs at 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost. NVIDIA runs at 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective for AMD versus 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective for NVIDIA.

Memory specifications differ completely. AMD has 256 GB of HBM3e with an 8192-bit bus and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA has 128 GB of LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute unit counts differ. AMD has 19,456 shading units, 1,216 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. NVIDIA has 6,144 shading units, 384 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. AMD has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores listed. NVIDIA has 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores.

Pixel and texture rates differ. AMD reports 0 MPixel/s and 2,553.6 GTexel/s. NVIDIA reports 112.6 GPixel/s and 900.9 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 throughput differ at 81.72 TFLOPS for AMD versus 28.83 TFLOPS for NVIDIA, both with a 1:1 ratio.

Power and form factor differ. AMD has a 1000 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. NVIDIA has an unknown TDP and no suggested PSU. AMD uses an OAM Module slot width. NVIDIA uses an IGP slot width. Both have no power connectors. AMD has no display outputs. NVIDIA has 1x HDMI.

Release dates differ: 2024-10-09 for AMD and 2026-05-31 for NVIDIA. Production status is unlisted for AMD and Active for NVIDIA. The predecessor field lists Radeon Instinct for AMD and nothing for NVIDIA. Neither part has a successor, launch MSRP, dimensions, or game clock recorded. Both have N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support.