AMD Instinct MI350P vs AMD Radeon RX 7600 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the architectural difference between the AMD Instinct MI350P and the AMD Radeon RX 7600?

A: The MI350P uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture on a 3 nm process, while the RX 7600 uses RDNA 3.0 on a 6 nm process. The MI350P is built for compute-optimized Instinct (MIx) generation hardware, whereas the RX 7600 belongs to the Radeon RX 7000 series and the Navi III (RX 7000) generation.

Q: How do memory capacities and bandwidth compare between the two cards?

A: The MI350P features 144 GB of HBM3e memory on a 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s. The MI350P offers 18 times the capacity and over 28 times the bandwidth.

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 21.75 TFLOPS for the RX 7600. This represents a 65.7% advantage for the Instinct card, though the RX 7600 also matches its FP16 output at a 1:1 ratio.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The MI350P has a 600 W TDP with a suggested 1000 W power supply and a single 16-pin connector. The RX 7600 has a 165 W TDP with a suggested 450 W power supply and a single 8-pin connector.

Q: Do both cards support standard graphics APIs?

A: No. The RX 7600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and has display outputs including 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The MI350P lists no APIs and has no display outputs, reflecting its accelerator-focused design.

Q: What is the RX 7600's benchmark percentile, and how does it compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 7600 sits at the 57th percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 15171. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, scores 15199, a delta of -0.2%, meaning the RX 7600 trails by a negligible margin. The AMD Radeon Pro 560X trails by 0.6%, the AMD Radeon 680M leads by 0.7%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti sits 0.7% behind.

Architecture Differences

The MI350P and RX 7600 diverge sharply in their fundamental design goals. The MI350P is built on CDNA 4.0, a compute-focused architecture fabricated at 3 nm by TSMC. The RX 7600 uses RDNA 3.0, a graphics-oriented architecture on a 6 nm process. The transistor counts reflect this split: the MI350P packs 73,000 million transistors across a 1190 mm² die, yielding a density of 61.3M per mm². The RX 7600 integrates 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, with a slightly higher density of 65.2M per mm².

The MI350P's chip, designated MI350 128CU, contains 8192 shading units and 512 texture mapping units. It reports 0 ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, a clear indicator that the hardware is not designed for rasterization output. The RX 7600, by contrast, uses the Navi 33 chip with 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. It also includes 32 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the MI350P's specification sheet. The MI350P lists no RT cores and no tensor cores, while the RX 7600 also lacks dedicated tensor cores.

Memory architecture further separates the two. The MI350P uses HBM3e with 144 GB capacity, an 8192-bit bus, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7600 relies on GDDR6 with 8 GB capacity, a 128-bit bus, and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. Clock behavior also differs: the MI350P runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the RX 7600 operates at 1720 MHz base, 2250 MHz game clock, and 2655 MHz boost. The higher boost clock on the RX 7600 partially compensates for its smaller shader array, but the MI350P's raw throughput remains significantly higher.

The MI350P's display output section reads "No outputs," and its API support is marked N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The RX 7600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and provides 1x HDMI 2.1a plus 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The MI350P uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RX 7600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Physical dimensions also differ, with the MI350P measuring 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, versus the RX 7600's 204 mm length and 115 mm height.

The Verdict

The data positions the MI350P as a compute accelerator with no display path and no graphics API support. Its 36.04 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 144 GB HBM3e memory, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth target data-center workloads that require massive parallel processing and memory capacity. The absence of ROPs, pixel output, and display connectors confirms that this card is not for desktop graphics use.

The RX 7600 is a conventional consumer graphics card. It delivers 21.75 TFLOPS FP32, 169.9 GPixel/s pixel rate, 339.8 GTexel/s texture rate, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. Its 57th percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 15171 place it in the midrange of the database, with its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, essentially tied at -0.2% delta. The RX 7600's 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth suit 1080p and 1440p gaming scenarios.

Selection depends entirely on workload. For compute-heavy tasks that require enormous memory pools and extreme bandwidth, the MI350P is the only option between the two. For any graphics rendering, gaming, or display output, the RX 7600 is the functional choice. The MI350P's 600 W TDP and 1000 W suggested PSU also indicate a data-center power envelope, whereas the RX 7600's 165 W TDP and 450 W suggested PSU fit a standard desktop. The RX 7600 has a launch MSRP of 269 USD, while the MI350P does not carry a public launch MSRP in the database.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measurable specification. The MI350P uses a 3 nm process node, while the RX 7600 uses 6 nm. Transistor counts are 73,000 million versus 13,300 million. Die size measures 1190 mm² against 204 mm². Transistor density is 61.3M per mm² for the MI350P and 65.2M per mm² for the RX 7600.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The MI350P runs at 1000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost. The RX 7600 runs at 1720 MHz base, 2655 MHz boost, and a 2250 MHz game clock. Memory clocks also differ: the MI350P uses 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective, while the RX 7600 uses 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. The MI350P offers 144 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7600 offers 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units number 8192 versus 2048. TMUs number 512 versus 128. The MI350P reports 0 ROPs and 0 MPixel/s pixel rate, while the RX 7600 reports 64 ROPs and 169.9 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 1,126.4 GTexel/s for the MI350P and 339.8 GTexel/s for the RX 7600. FP32 output is 36.04 TFLOPS versus 21.75 TFLOPS, with both at FP16 1:1.

Power and connectivity also separate the two. The MI350P has a 600 W TDP, a 1000 W suggested PSU, and a 1x 16-pin connector. The RX 7600 has a 165 W TDP, a 450 W suggested PSU, and a 1x 8-pin connector. The MI350P uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RX 7600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are absent on the MI350P and present on the RX 7600 as 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. API support is N/A on the MI350P and includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 on the RX 7600. Dimensions measure 267 mm by 111 mm by 40 mm for the MI350P and 204 mm by 115 mm for the RX 7600. Release dates differ as well: the MI350P is dated 2026-05-06, while the RX 7600 is dated 2023-05-24.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the MI350P and RX 7600. The MI350P has no recorded benchmark scores, an average score of 0, and sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs. The RX 7600, by contrast, has ten recorded benchmark entries across multiple test suites.

Examining the RX 7600's recorded results provides context for its performance tier. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RX 7600 scores 2310. Geekbench OpenCL yields 88051, and Geekbench Vulkan yields 34401. Passmark results include 84 in DirectX 10, 172 in DirectX 11, 58 in DirectX 12, and 226 in DirectX 9. The G2D score is 984, the G3D score is 16634, and the GPU compute score is 8790. The average benchmark score across these runs is 15171.

The RX 7600's nearest rivals confirm its competitive positioning. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM averages 15199, a delta of -0.2% relative to the RX 7600, meaning the RX 7600 trails by a hair. The AMD Radeon Pro 560X averages 15082, a delta of 0.6% in the RX 7600's favor. The AMD Radeon 680M averages 15270, a delta of -0.7%, indicating the RX 7600 falls slightly behind that integrated solution. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti averages 15063, a delta of 0.7%, placing the RX 7600 ahead by the largest margin in this rival set.

The MI350P's 50th percentile ranking versus the RX 7600's 57th percentile does not imply the RX 7600 is the faster compute device. The percentile reflects the absence of benchmark data for the MI350P, not a measured performance deficit. The MI350P's raw specifications, including 4 times the shading units and 28 times the memory bandwidth, indicate a fundamentally different performance class. The RX 7600's benchmark scores are all graphics-oriented tests, a category in which the MI350P cannot participate due to its lack of API support and display outputs. The only meaningful comparison comes from the theoretical compute figures: 36.04 TFLOPS FP32 for the MI350P versus 21.75 TFLOPS for the RX 7600, a 65.7% advantage that would manifest in compute workloads the MI350P is designed to handle.