AMD Instinct MI350P vs AMD Radeon 840M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350P and the AMD Radeon 840M occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, and the recorded data reflects a complete separation of use cases. The MI350P is a data center accelerator built around the CDNA 4.0 architecture, with no display outputs and no consumer API support. The Radeon 840M is an integrated graphics processor for mobile systems, built around RDNA 3.5, with full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. The benchmark data shows zero head-to-head wins for either part, which aligns with their divergent target environments.

The MI350P wins in raw compute capability, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth. It carries 144 GB of HBM3e memory across a 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The 840M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. The MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput and 36.04 TFLOPS of FP16 throughput at a 1:1 ratio. The 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS of FP32 and 1,484.8 GFLOPS of FP16, also at a 1:1 ratio. The scale difference is roughly 24-fold in raw floating-point throughput, based on the figures in the database.

The Radeon 840M wins in integration and portability. It is an IGP, which means it is designed to be embedded into a mobile processor package. Its thermal design power is 15 W, compared to 600 W for the MI350P, and it requires no power connectors, whereas the MI350P requires a single 16-pin connector and a 1000 W suggested power supply. The 840M is listed as active in production status, while the MI350P has no production status recorded. The 840M also has a release date earlier in the database, 2025, versus 2026 for the MI350P.

The Radeon 840M supports ray tracing with 4 RT cores, while the MI350P lists no RT core count. The MI350P has 8,192 shading units and 512 texture mapping units, while the 840M has 256 shading units and 16 TMUs. The MI350P has zero ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, which indicates it is not designed for rasterized graphics output. The 840M has 8 ROPs and a pixel rate of 23.20 GPixel/s. The MI350P is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm by 111 mm by 40 mm, while the 840M has no recorded dimensions because it is an integrated part.

Architecture Differences

The two chips are built on different architectures and different process nodes. The MI350P uses CDNA 4.0, a compute-focused architecture, fabricated by TSMC at 3 nm. The 840M uses RDNA 3.5, a graphics-focused architecture, fabricated by TSMC at 4 nm. The MI350P chip is designated as MI350 128CU, while the 840M chip is designated as Krackan Point. Both are AMD products, but they belong to different generations: the MI350P is in the Instinct (MIx) generation, and the 840M is in the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation.

The MI350P has 73,000 million transistors on a 1190 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 61.3M per mm². The 840M has unknown transistor count and unknown die size in the database. The MI350P operates at a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz, with memory clocked at 2000 MHz, 8 Gbps effective. The 840M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, with system shared memory. The 840M has a higher boost clock by 700 MHz, but the MI350P has a much larger execution resource pool.

Memory architecture is the most significant divider. The MI350P has 144 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus. The 840M has no dedicated memory; it relies on system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The MI350P has a fixed memory bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s, while the 840M has no fixed bandwidth number. The MI350P also uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the 840M uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

The feature sets differ sharply. The MI350P has no display outputs and lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The 840M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, with display outputs described as portable device dependent. The MI350P has no RT cores recorded, while the 840M has 4. The MI350P has no tensor core count recorded; the 840M also has no tensor core count recorded. The MI350P has zero ROPs, which is consistent with a compute accelerator that does not perform traditional pixel output.

Power delivery and physical design also differentiate the parts. The MI350P is a dual-slot card that draws 600 W and uses a single 16-pin power connector. The 840M is an IGP that draws 15 W and uses no power connectors. The MI350P has a suggested PSU rating of 1000 W; the 840M has no suggested PSU field. The MI350P measures 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The 840M has no dimensions recorded. The MI350P's predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct, while the 840M's predecessor is Navi II IGP. Neither part has a successor recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for the MI350P versus the Radeon 840M. The wins count for each side is zero, and the nearest rivals lists are empty for both parts. This means no direct comparative scores exist in the recorded data. However, the specification data provides a basis for comparing their expected strengths.

In FP32 compute, the MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS, which is 36,040 GFLOPS. The 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The MI350P is therefore approximately 24.3 times higher in FP32 throughput. In FP16, both parts maintain a 1:1 ratio with their FP32 figures, so the relative difference remains the same. The MI350P's texture rate is 1,126.4 GTexel/s, while the 840M's texture rate is 46.40 GTexel/s. The MI350P is about 24.3 times higher in texture rate as well, which is consistent with its larger number of TMUs: 512 versus 16.

Pixel rate is the one metric where the 840M is ahead. The MI350P has 0 MPixel/s, while the 840M has 23.20 GPixel/s. This is because the MI350P has zero ROPs and no display pipeline. The 840M has 8 ROPs and is designed for graphics output. This is a meaningful advantage for the 840M in any rasterization workload, though the MI350P is not intended for such tasks.

Shading unit count favors the MI350P heavily. The MI350P has 8,192 shading units, while the 840M has 256. That is a 32-fold difference. The MI350P also has a larger memory bus: 8192 bits versus system shared for the 840M. The MI350P's memory bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s is a fixed figure, whereas the 840M's bandwidth is system dependent, so no direct comparison number exists.

Clock speeds show a different relationship. The 840M has a boost clock of 2900 MHz, which is 700 MHz higher than the MI350P's 2200 MHz boost. The 840M also has a lower base clock of 400 MHz, compared to the MI350P's 1000 MHz. The higher boost clock on the 840M does not compensate for the much smaller execution resource pool. The MI350P's 3 nm process node is one step ahead of the 840M's 4 nm node, though the 840M's die size and transistor count are unknown.

The power envelope reinforces the positioning. The MI350P consumes 600 W, which is 40 times the 840M's 15 W. The MI350P requires a 1000 W suggested power supply and a 16-pin connector. The 840M requires no external power. The MI350P is a dual-slot accelerator, while the 840M is an IGP. The release dates in the database place the 840M earlier, with a 2025 date, and the MI350P later, with a 2026 date.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS, while the AMD Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The MI350P is approximately 24 times higher in FP32 throughput.

Q: Does the Radeon 840M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Radeon 840M has 4 RT cores. The Instinct MI350P does not have an RT core count recorded in the database.

Q: What memory does each GPU use?

A: The MI350P uses 144 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 840M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has display outputs?

A: The Radeon 840M has display outputs described as portable device dependent. The Instinct MI350P has no display outputs.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The MI350P has a TDP of 600 W and requires a 1000 W suggested power supply. The Radeon 840M has a TDP of 15 W and uses no power connectors.

Q: Which GPU is built on a smaller process node?

A: The MI350P is built on a 3 nm process from TSMC. The Radeon 840M is built on a 4 nm process from TSMC.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows two AMD GPUs with no overlap in intended function. The Instinct MI350P is a compute accelerator with 36.04 TFLOPS FP32, 8.19 TB/s memory bandwidth, 144 GB of HBM3e, and a 600 W power envelope. The Radeon 840M is an integrated mobile GPU with 1,484.8 GFLOPS FP32, 23.20 GPixel/s pixel rate, 4 RT cores, and a 15 W power envelope. The MI350P has no display outputs and no consumer API support. The 840M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The MI350P should be selected for compute-heavy workloads that require large memory capacity and high bandwidth. Its 144 GB memory and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth are the standout figures. Its 8,192 shading units and 512 TMUs support its 36.04 TFLOPS throughput. The lack of ROPs and display outputs is irrelevant for compute tasks. The 600 W power draw and 1000 W suggested PSU indicate a data center environment.

The Radeon 840M should be selected for mobile systems that need graphics output and API compatibility. Its 23.20 GPixel/s pixel rate and 8 ROPs enable rasterized display. Its 4 RT cores provide ray tracing capability. The 15 W power draw and absence of power connectors make it suitable for integrated designs. The 2900 MHz boost clock is the highest clock figure recorded in this comparison.

Neither part has benchmark scores, average scores, or nearest rivals recorded in the database. The percentile versus all GPUs is 50 for both, and the average benchmark score is 0 for both. The head-to-head wins are 0 for each side. The data supports a clear split: the MI350P for compute density and memory scale, the Radeon 840M for integrated graphics and mobile deployment.