AMD Instinct MI350P vs AMD Radeon RX 7800M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Instinct MI350P and the AMD Radeon RX 7800M. The MI350P has no recorded benchmark scores, while the RX 7800M has ten individual benchmark entries. This absence of overlapping test data means a direct score-to-score comparison cannot be performed. Instead, the analysis relies on the recorded specifications, architectural characteristics, and the RX 7800M's performance relative to its nearest rivals.

The RX 7800M's average benchmark score is 27,883, placing it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 with an average score of 27,839 (0.2% lower), the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X at 27,973 (0.3% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti at 28,020 (0.5% higher), and the AMD FirePro S7150 at 28,117 (0.8% higher). These deltas are small, indicating the RX 7800M sits in a tightly contested performance band.

For the MI350P, the percentile ranking is 50th, with an average benchmark score of zero. The absence of any benchmark entries means the database cannot place it relative to any rival. The recorded data indicates the MI350P is a compute-oriented accelerator with no display outputs, no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API support, and a pixel rate of zero. These factors are consistent with a device not designed for rasterized graphics workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7800M wins in every benchmark category where data exists. Its strongest result appears in Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 126,668, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 120,778. In PassMark testing, the G3D score is 17,613, the GPU compute score is 9,342, and the G2D score is 892. DirectX results are lower: DirectX 11 scores 176, DirectX 9 scores 174, DirectX 10 scores 99, and DirectX 12 scores 89. These results show a device that performs best in modern compute APIs and general 3D rendering, with weaker legacy API performance.

The MI350P has no recorded wins because it has no recorded benchmarks. Its specifications, however, indicate strengths in memory capacity and bandwidth. It offers 144 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7800M provides 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s. The MI350P's memory subsystem is far larger, but without benchmark scores, the database cannot quantify the impact on real workloads.

The MI350P also uses a 3 nm process from TSMC with 73,000 million transistors on a 1190 mm² die. The RX 7800M uses a 5 nm process with 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die. The MI350P has a lower transistor density at 61.3M per mm² versus 81.2M for the RX 7800M, indicating different design priorities. The MI350P is built for scale and memory bandwidth, while the RX 7800M is built for density and power efficiency.

The Verdict

The data shows two fundamentally different devices. The AMD Radeon RX 7800M is a mobile graphics processor with a full API stack, 60 ray tracing cores, 96 ROPs, and a 180 W TDP. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its production status is Active, and it has a release date in September 2024. The recorded benchmarks show it performing in the 73rd percentile, with its nearest rivals within a 1% margin. This indicates a consistent, competitive graphics solution for portable devices.

The AMD Instinct MI350P is a datacenter accelerator with no graphics outputs and no graphics API support. It has a 600 W TDP, a 1000 W suggested PSU, and a dual-slot form factor. Its memory configuration of 144 GB HBM3e with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth is the dominant specification. The chip is labeled MI350 128CU, using CDNA 4.0 architecture. Its release date is May 2026. The absence of benchmarks and a 50th percentile rank with zero average score means the database cannot assess its real-world compute performance.

Users should choose based on workload type. For graphics rendering, gaming, or any application requiring DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, the RX 7800M is the only option with recorded support. For large-scale memory-bound compute tasks in a datacenter environment, the MI350P's specifications indicate it is designed for that purpose, but the lack of benchmark data precludes a data-driven endorsement. The database records no head-to-head wins for either product, so any selection must rely on the architectural and specification differences outlined here.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI350P support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: No. The database lists DirectX as N/A for the MI350P, along with OpenGL and Vulkan as N/A. It has no display outputs.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two GPUs?

A: The MI350P has 8.19 TB/s from 144 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus. The RX 7800M has 432.0 GB/s from 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 7800M has a boost clock of 2335 MHz. The MI350P has a boost clock of 2200 MHz.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the RX 7800M?

A: The average benchmark score is 27,883, placing it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs in the database.

Q: How many shading units does the MI350P have compared to the RX 7800M?

A: The MI350P has 8,192 shading units. The RX 7800M has 3,840 shading units.

Q: What is the release date for each product?

A: The RX 7800M has a release date of September 10, 2024. The MI350P has a release date of May 6, 2026.

Architecture Differences

The MI350P uses CDNA 4.0 architecture, designed for compute acceleration. The RX 7800M uses RDNA 3.0 architecture, designed for graphics rendering. This distinction drives nearly every other difference in the recorded data.

The MI350P's chip is labeled MI350 128CU, built on a 3 nm TSMC process. It contains 73,000 million transistors on a 1190 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 61.3M per mm². The RX 7800M's chip is Navi 32, built on a 5 nm TSMC process. It contains 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2M per mm². The MI350P has more total transistors but a lower density, reflecting a design that prioritizes large memory interfaces and compute units over area efficiency.

The MI350P has 8,192 shading units, 512 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. Its pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s, and its texture rate is 1,126.4 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 36.04 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 36.04 TFLOPS in a 1:1 ratio. The RX 7800M has 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. Its pixel rate is 224.2 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 560.4 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 35.87 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 35.87 TFLOPS in a 1:1 ratio. The compute throughput figures are nearly identical, but the MI350P has no ROPs, indicating it cannot perform traditional pixel output.

The RX 7800M includes 60 ray tracing cores, while the MI350P lists no ray tracing cores. The MI350P lists no tensor cores, and the RX 7800M also lists none. The RX 7800M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI350P lists N/A for all three APIs.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The MI350P uses 144 GB of HBM3e with an 8192-bit bus and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. Memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective. The RX 7800M uses 12 GB of GDDR6 with a 192-bit bus and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

Power and physical design also diverge. The MI350P has a 600 W TDP, a 1000 W suggested PSU, a dual-slot form factor, and a 1x 16-pin power connector. Dimensions are 267 mm length, 111 mm height, and 40 mm width. The RX 7800M has a 180 W TDP, no power connectors, and an IGP slot width. Its dimensions are not recorded. The MI350P uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RX 7800M uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

The MI350P has no display outputs. The RX 7800M has outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent." The MI350P's predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct, while the RX 7800M's predecessor is Polaris Mobile. Both have no recorded successor. The MI350P's production status is not recorded, while the RX 7800M is marked Active.