AMD Instinct MI350P vs AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for AMD Instinct MI350P and AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE shows no direct head-to-head benchmark entries. The MI350P has no benchmark scores in the database, while the RX 7650 GRE carries two results: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2336 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 83109. The MI350P's average benchmark score is 0, placing it at the 50th percentile among all GPUs. The RX 7650 GRE averages 42723 across its tests, placing it at the 83rd percentile.

The RX 7650 GRE's nearest rivals in the database are all NVIDIA products. Its average score of 42723 sits 1.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER (43223) and 1.2% behind the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB (43262). It trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile (43268) by 1.3% and the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 (43301) by 1.3%. These margins are narrow, indicating the RX 7650 GRE clusters tightly with that performance group.

The MI350P's absence of benchmark data means the database records no wins for either product in direct comparison. The wins counter shows 0 for both. However, the FP32 compute figures provide a measurable gap: the MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS while the RX 7650 GRE delivers 22.08 TFLOPS. That is a 63% advantage for the MI350P in raw FP32 throughput. In FP16, both parts run at 1:1 ratios, so the MI350P again holds 36.04 TFLOPS against 22.08 TFLOPS.

Texture rate further separates the two. The MI350P reaches 1,126.4 GTexel/s, while the RX 7650 GRE reaches 345.0 GTexel/s. The MI350P's texture throughput is roughly 3.3 times higher. Pixel rate tells the opposite story: the MI350P records 0 MPixel/s because it has no ROPs, while the RX 7650 GRE outputs 172.5 GPixel/s from its 64 ROPs. The MI350P is not designed for rasterized display output, which the specification confirms with no display outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU shows higher FP32 compute in the database?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P records 36.04 TFLOPS FP32, versus 22.08 TFLOPS for the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE.

Q: What memory configurations do the two cards use?

A: The MI350P uses 144 GB of HBM3e on a 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7650 GRE uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the MI350P support display outputs?

A: No. The MI350P lists no display outputs. The RX 7650 GRE provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The MI350P uses a 3 nm process, while the RX 7650 GRE uses a 6 nm process, both from TSMC.

Q: How do their transistor counts differ?

A: The MI350P contains 73,000 million transistors on a 1190 mm² die. The RX 7650 GRE contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die.

Q: What API support does each card list?

A: The MI350P lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The RX 7650 GRE lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The MI350P uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture with the MI350 128CU chip, built on a 3 nm TSMC process. The RX 7650 GRE uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, built on a 6 nm TSMC process. These are fundamentally different designs: CDNA targets compute acceleration, while RDNA targets graphics rendering.

Die size and transistor density show a clear split. The MI350P measures 1190 mm² with 73,000 million transistors, yielding 61.3M transistors per mm². The RX 7650 GRE measures 204 mm² with 13,300 million transistors, yielding 65.2M transistors per mm². The RX 7650 GRE packs transistors slightly tighter per area, but the MI350P's much larger die gives it roughly 5.5 times the total transistor count.

The MI350P has 8192 shading units and 512 texture mapping units, but zero ROPs. The RX 7650 GRE has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. The MI350P has no listed ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The RX 7650 GRE also has no tensor cores listed. The MI350P's lack of ROPs and display outputs confirms it is not a rasterized graphics card. The RX 7650 GRE's 172.5 GPixel/s pixel rate and 64 ROPs support standard rendering pipelines.

Memory architecture differs sharply. The MI350P uses 144 GB of HBM3e with an 8192-bit bus and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7650 GRE uses 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI350P's memory bandwidth is over 28 times higher. Clock behavior also diverges: the MI350P runs a 1000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the RX 7650 GRE runs 1720 MHz base, 2350 MHz game clock, and 2695 MHz boost. The RX 7650 GRE achieves higher clock speeds, but the MI350P compensates with massively wider memory and more compute units.

Power and connectivity reflect their different roles. The MI350P draws 600 W TDP with a 1000 W suggested PSU and a single 16-pin connector. The RX 7650 GRE draws 170 W TDP with a 450 W suggested PSU and a single 8-pin connector. The MI350P uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RX 7650 GRE uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The MI350P is dual-slot at 267 mm length, 111 mm height, and 40 mm width. The RX 7650 GRE is dual-slot at 204 mm length and 115 mm height, with no width listed.

The Verdict

The database clearly separates these two products by purpose. The MI350P is a compute accelerator: no display outputs, no ROPs, no graphics API support, 144 GB of HBM3e, and a 600 W power envelope. It records no benchmark scores, so its average sits at 0 with a 50th percentile ranking. Its FP32 throughput of 36.04 TFLOPS and texture rate of 1,126.4 GTexel/s indicate heavy parallel compute capability, but the data provides no application-level confirmation.

The RX 7650 GRE is a conventional graphics card. It has 8 GB of GDDR6, 64 ROPs, 32 ray tracing cores, full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, plus four display outputs. Its average benchmark score of 42723 places it at the 83rd percentile, within 1.3% of several NVIDIA rivals. The RX 7650 GRE is rated as active production, while the MI350P has no production status listed. The MI350P's launch MSRP is not recorded; the RX 7650 GRE has a launch MSRP of 279 USD.

A user needing display output, ray tracing, or standard graphics APIs should choose the RX 7650 GRE. A user needing massive memory capacity, very high compute throughput, or extremely wide memory bandwidth should choose the MI350P. The data does not support using the MI350P for gaming or desktop graphics, nor does it support using the RX 7650 GRE for the MI350P's compute-class workloads.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every recorded specification. The MI350P uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture, 3 nm process, and a 1190 mm² die with 73,000 million transistors. The RX 7650 GRE uses RDNA 3.0, 6 nm process, and a 204 mm² die with 13,300 million transistors. The MI350P has 8192 shading units and 512 TMUs, while the RX 7650 GRE has 2048 shading units and 128 TMUs. The MI350P has 0 ROPs; the RX 7650 GRE has 64.

Memory differs completely: 144 GB HBM3e on 8192-bit with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth versus 8 GB GDDR6 on 128-bit with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. Clock speeds favor the RX 7650 GRE in boost (2695 MHz vs 2200 MHz), game clock (2350 MHz, not present on the MI350P), and memory clock (2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective vs 2000 MHz 8 Gbps effective). Base clock also favors the RX 7650 GRE at 1720 MHz versus 1000 MHz.

Compute rates favor the MI350P in FP32 (36.04 vs 22.08 TFLOPS), FP16 (36.04 vs 22.08 TFLOPS), and texture rate (1,126.4 vs 345.0 GTexel/s). Pixel rate favors the RX 7650 GRE at 172.5 GPixel/s versus 0 MPixel/s. Power favors the RX 7650 GRE at 170 W TDP versus 600 W, with a 450 W suggested PSU versus 1000 W. The MI350P has no display outputs, while the RX 7650 GRE has 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The MI350P uses PCIe 5.0 x16; the RX 7650 GRE uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The MI350P lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan; the RX 7650 GRE lists 12 Ultimate (12_2), 4.6, and 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The MI350P wins on raw compute throughput. Its 36.04 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 figures exceed the RX 7650 GRE's 22.08 TFLOPS by 63%. Its texture rate of 1,126.4 GTexel/s is over three times the RX 7650 GRE's 345.0 GTexel/s. Its memory subsystem, 144 GB HBM3e with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, dominates the RX 7650 GRE's 8 GB GDDR6 at 288.0 GB/s. The MI350P's 8192-bit bus and 8192 shading units position it for parallel workloads where memory capacity and bandwidth are the limiting factors.

The RX 7650 GRE wins on graphics functionality and practical deployment. It has 64 ROPs, 32 ray tracing cores, 172.5 GPixel/s pixel rate, full graphics API support, and four display outputs. Its 170 W TDP and 450 W suggested PSU make it far less demanding on system power. Its 204 mm length fits smaller chassis. Its active production status and recorded launch MSRP of 279 USD indicate retail availability, whereas the MI350P has no production status or MSRP recorded.

The RX 7650 GRE also wins on measured benchmark performance in the database. Its average score of 42723 places it at the 83rd percentile, while the MI350P's average of 0 places it at the 50th percentile. The RX 7650 GRE's nearest rivals, all within 1.3% in either direction, show it competes directly with NVIDIA's RTX 4070 SUPER and Quadro M6000 variants. No comparable benchmark data exists for the MI350P, so its compute advantages remain theoretical in the database.

The MI350P wins in scenarios requiring large memory footprints, extreme bandwidth, or massive parallel throughput. The RX 7650 GRE wins in scenarios requiring rendering, ray tracing, display output, or low system power draw. The two products do not overlap in their intended usage.