AMD Instinct MI350P vs NVIDIA B300 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds of the AMD Instinct MI350P and the NVIDIA B300?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The NVIDIA B300 has a higher base clock of 1665 MHz but a lower boost clock of 2032 MHz.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each accelerator provide?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P delivers 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth across an 8192-bit bus. The NVIDIA B300 provides 4.10 TB/s across a 4096-bit bus. The MI350P has exactly double the bus width and roughly double the bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor count and process node for each chip?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P uses 73,000 million transistors on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA B300 uses 104,000 million transistors on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 (single-precision) throughput?

A: The NVIDIA B300 achieves 76.99 TFLOPS FP32, which is more than double the 36.04 TFLOPS of the AMD Instinct MI350P.

Q: What are the power specifications for these two accelerators?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P has a TDP of 600 W and requires a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The NVIDIA B300 has a TDP of 1400 W and requires a suggested PSU of 1800 W.

Q: When were these products released?

A: The NVIDIA B300 was released on September 10, 2025, and the AMD Instinct MI350P is scheduled for release on May 6, 2026.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI350P and NVIDIA B300 represent two distinct approaches to high-performance accelerators. The MI350P uses AMD's CDNA 4.0 architecture, while the B300 is built on NVIDIA's Blackwell Ultra architecture. The process nodes differ significantly: AMD employs a 3 nm process at TSMC, whereas NVIDIA uses a 5 nm process at the same foundry. This node advantage helps AMD achieve a transistor density of 61.3M per mm² on a 1190 mm² die, while NVIDIA does not disclose its die size or density.

The transistor counts tell a different story. The B300 packs 104,000 million transistors, notably more than the MI350P's 73,000 million. However, the MI350P's smaller process node allows it to fit those transistors into a compact 1190 mm² package. The AMD chip is physically a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The NVIDIA B300 uses an SXM module form factor, with no listed dimensions.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. Both cards have 144 GB of HBM3e memory, but the MI350P uses an 8192-bit bus width, yielding 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The B300 uses a 4096-bit bus, producing 4.10 TB/s. The MI350P has double the memory bus width and double the bandwidth. Both run memory at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective speed.

The compute unit layouts are fundamentally different. The MI350P has 8192 shading units, 512 TMUs, and no ROPs, resulting in a texture rate of 1,126.4 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The B300 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores, achieving a texture rate of 1,202.9 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 48.77 GPixel/s. The B300's FP16 throughput is a massive 1,231.8 TFLOPS with a 16:1 ratio, while the MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The MI350P has no listed tensor cores or RT cores, whereas the B300 includes 592 tensor cores.

Power requirements differ dramatically. The MI350P draws 600 W TDP with a single 16-pin power connector and a suggested 1000 W PSU. The B300 draws 1400 W TDP with no listed power connector and a suggested 1800 W PSU. Neither card has display outputs. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 interfaces. The MI350P has no API support listed for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, while the B300's API support fields are null.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct benchmark scores for either accelerator, and no nearest rival data is available. The recorded percentile for both is 50 against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 0 for each. However, the specification data allows for direct comparison of theoretical peak performance.

The NVIDIA B300 dominates in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 performance of 76.99 TFLOPS is more than double the MI350P's 36.04 TFLOPS. The gap in FP16 is even more pronounced: the B300's 1,231.8 TFLOPS is roughly 34 times the MI350P's 36.04 TFLOPS. The B300 also edges out the MI350P in texture rate, delivering 1,202.9 GTexel/s versus 1,126.4 GTexel/s, a difference of about 6.8 percent.

The AMD Instinct MI350P counters with a decisive memory bandwidth advantage. At 8.19 TB/s, the MI350P provides exactly double the 4.10 TB/s of the B300. This stems from the 8192-bit bus versus the 4096-bit bus. For memory-bound workloads, this bandwidth advantage could offset some of the B300's compute lead.

Clock speeds present a mixed picture. The B300 has a higher base clock at 1665 MHz versus 1000 MHz, but the MI350P boosts higher at 2200 MHz versus 2032 MHz. The B300's base clock is 66.5 percent higher, while the MI350P's boost clock is 8.3 percent higher. This suggests the MI350P has more headroom under load, while the B300 starts from a stronger baseline.

Pixel throughput is entirely one-sided. The B300 delivers 48.77 GPixel/s, while the MI350P produces 0 MPixel/s due to having no ROPs. This indicates the MI350P is not designed for traditional rasterization workloads, whereas the B300 retains some pixel-processing capability.

The B300's tensor cores provide a structural advantage for AI and deep learning tasks, though no benchmark scores quantify this. The MI350P has no listed tensor cores, suggesting it relies on its shading units for such work. The B300's 592 tensor cores, combined with its massive FP16 throughput, position it as the more specialized accelerator for matrix operations.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear division of roles. The NVIDIA B300 is the higher-throughput accelerator in almost every compute metric. Its FP32 performance of 76.99 TFLOPS, FP16 performance of 1,231.8 TFLOPS, and texture rate of 1,202.9 GTexel/s all exceed the MI350P's corresponding figures. The B300 also has tensor cores, a higher base clock, and a larger transistor count at 104,000 million.

The AMD Instinct MI350P's advantage lies in memory bandwidth. Its 8.19 TB/s is double the B300's 4.10 TB/s, and its 8192-bit bus is twice as wide. This makes the MI350P potentially stronger for workloads that are bandwidth-limited rather than compute-limited. The MI350P also draws less power at 600 W versus 1400 W, and it uses a 3 nm process versus 5 nm, which contributes to its higher transistor density of 61.3M per mm².

The B300 was released in September 2025 and is marked as active production, with a successor listed as Server Rubin. The MI350P has a May 2026 release date and no successor listed. The B300's predecessor is Server Hopper, while the MI350P's predecessor is Radeon Instinct.

For users prioritizing maximum FP32 or FP16 throughput, the B300 is the data-supported choice. Its 76.99 TFLOPS FP32 and 1,231.8 TFLOPS FP16 are unmatched by the MI350P. For users prioritizing memory bandwidth, the MI350P's 8.19 TB/s is the clear winner. The MI350P also offers lower power consumption, which may factor into system design for dense deployments.

The B300's tensor cores and higher shading unit count (18,944 versus 8,192) suggest it is built for compute-heavy AI workloads. The MI350P's lack of ROPs and pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s indicate it is purely a compute accelerator, not a graphics card. Neither product has display outputs, and both use PCIe 5.0 x16.

The B300's 1400 W TDP and 1800 W suggested PSU are substantial power requirements, while the MI350P's 600 W TDP and 1000 W PSU are more modest. The B300 uses an SXM module, while the MI350P is a dual-slot card with a 16-pin connector. These physical differences affect system integration.

In the absence of benchmark scores, the specification data provides the only basis for comparison. The B300 wins on compute density, while the MI350P wins on memory bandwidth and power efficiency. The choice depends on workload characteristics: the B300 for compute-bound tasks, the MI350P for memory-bound tasks.

Specification Differences

The two accelerators differ across nearly every measurable specification. The AMD Instinct MI350P uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture with an MI350 128CU chip, while the NVIDIA B300 uses Blackwell Ultra with a GB110 chip. The MI350P is on a 3 nm process with 73,000 million transistors and a die size of 1190 mm²; the B300 is on a 5 nm process with 104,000 million transistors and no listed die size.

Clock speeds differ: the MI350P runs at 1000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the B300 runs at 1665 MHz base and 2032 MHz boost. Both use HBM3e memory with 144 GB capacity, but the MI350P has an 8192-bit bus and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, versus the B300's 4096-bit bus and 4.10 TB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources are starkly different: the MI350P has 8,192 shading units, 512 TMUs, and 0 ROPs; the B300 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores. The MI350P's texture rate is 1,126.4 GTexel/s with 0 MPixel/s pixel rate, while the B300 achieves 1,202.9 GTexel/s and 48.77 GPixel/s.

FP32 throughput is 36.04 TFLOPS for the MI350P and 76.99 TFLOPS for the B300. FP16 throughput is 36.04 TFLOPS (1:1) for the MI350P and 1,231.8 TFLOPS (16:1) for the B300. Power specifications show the MI350P at 600 W TDP with a 1000 W suggested PSU and a 16-pin connector, while the B300 is at 1400 W TDP with an 1800 W suggested PSU and no listed connector.

Form factors differ: the MI350P is dual-slot with dimensions of 267 mm by 111 mm by 40 mm, while the B300 is an SXM module with no dimensions listed. The MI350P has no API support listed, while the B300 has null values. The MI350P has no production status, while the B300 is marked active. Release dates are May 6, 2026 for the MI350P and September 10, 2025 for the B300. The MI350P's predecessor is Radeon Instinct, while the B300's is Server Hopper; the B300 also has a successor, Server Rubin.