AMD Instinct MI350P vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural identities of the AMD Instinct MI350P and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture on a 3 nm process node, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 uses the Ampere architecture on an 8 nm process node. The MI350P is a compute-focused Instinct accelerator, whereas the RTX 4010 is a GeForce 40-series consumer graphics card.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare between the two cards?

A: The MI350P has 144 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4010 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s. The MI350P's memory bandwidth is roughly two orders of magnitude higher.

Q: Which card has more shading units and what does that imply for raw compute?

A: The MI350P has 8192 shading units, while the RTX 4010 has 768. Accordingly, the MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS FP32, and the RTX 4010 delivers 2.706 TFLOPS FP32. The MI350P holds a substantial raw compute advantage.

Q: What is the power draw and physical footprint of each card?

A: The MI350P has a TDP of 600 W, uses a dual-slot design, and requires a single 16-pin power connector. The RTX 4010 has a TDP of 50 W, uses a single-slot design, and requires no power connectors.

Q: Does the RTX 4010 support modern graphics APIs, and does the MI350P?

A: The RTX 4010 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI350P lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating it is not designed for graphics API workloads.

Q: What is the recorded benchmark performance for the RTX 4010, and how does it rank?

A: The RTX 4010 scores 2893 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. Its percentile versus all GPUs is 18. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB, scores 2907, which is 0.5% higher.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI350P and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 diverge sharply in every architectural layer. The MI350P is built on CDNA 4.0, AMD's compute-oriented architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The RTX 4010 uses NVIDIA's Ampere architecture on an 8 nm process from Samsung. This process difference is foundational: the MI350P packs 73,000 million transistors onto a 1190 mm² die, while the RTX 4010 contains 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. Transistor density follows, with the MI350P at 61.3M per mm² versus 43.5M per mm² for the RTX 4010.

The compute pipelines are entirely different in scale. The MI350P has 8192 shading units and 512 texture mapping units, but zero ROPs, reflecting its role as a pure compute accelerator with no display output. The RTX 4010 has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, plus 6 ray tracing cores and 24 tensor cores. The MI350P reports no RT or tensor core counts, as its architecture is not aimed at graphics rendering.

Memory architecture is another major split. The MI350P uses HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus, reaching 8.19 TB/s. The RTX 4010 uses GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, reaching 96.00 GB/s. The MI350P's memory bandwidth is about 85 times higher, a distinction that directly impacts data-intensive workloads. Clock behavior also differs: the MI350P runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the RTX 4010 runs at 1417 MHz base and 1762 MHz boost. The MI350P's memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective, and the RTX 4010's memory clock is 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective.

The API support is a stark contrast. The RTX 4010 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI350P lists N/A for all three, confirming no consumer graphics API path. The MI350P has no display outputs, while the RTX 4010 provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 5.0 x16 on the MI350P versus PCIe 4.0 x8 on the RTX 4010.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for these two cards, and the MI350P has no benchmark scores or nearest rivals listed. The RTX 4010 has one recorded benchmark: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2893. The MI350P's average benchmark score is 0, and its percentile versus all GPUs is 50, which is a neutral placement given no data.

The RTX 4010's recorded score places it at the 18th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals, all within 1% of its score, are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB at 2907 (0.5% higher), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF at 2910 (0.6% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB at 2913 (0.7% higher), and the NVIDIA Quadro P600 at 2923 (1% higher). This clustering indicates the RTX 4010 sits at the low end of a narrow performance band in this specific DX12 test.

The MI350P cannot be compared in this benchmark context because no such data exists. Its FP32 throughput of 36.04 TFLOPS versus the RTX 4010's 2.706 TFLOPS is the only quantitative compute comparison available. Similarly, texture rate differs: 1,126.4 GTexel/s for the MI350P versus 42.29 GTexel/s for the RTX 4010. The pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for the MI350P and 28.19 GPixel/s for the RTX 4010, indicating the MI350P does not rasterize.

The Verdict

The data shows two devices with no functional overlap. The AMD Instinct MI350P is a server-class compute accelerator with 144 GB of HBM3e, 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, and 36.04 TFLOPS FP32, but it lacks display outputs and graphics API support. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 is a low-power consumer graphics card with 4 GB of GDDR6, 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth, 2.706 TFLOPS FP32, and full support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The MI350P targets workloads that require massive memory capacity and bandwidth, with its 8192-bit bus and 73,000 million transistors indicating a design for large-scale compute. The RTX 4010, with a 50 W TDP and no power connectors, is suited for environments where power consumption and physical space are constrained. Its 18th percentile ranking in the recorded benchmark confirms it is not a high-performance gaming card, but it does render and output video, which the MI350P cannot.

The recorded data contains no benchmark where both cards compete, so any direct performance comparison is limited to specification-level differences. The MI350P's FP32 throughput is over 13 times that of the RTX 4010, and its bandwidth is over 85 times higher. The RTX 4010, however, is the only one of the two that can run graphics workloads, as indicated by its API support and display outputs.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measured field. The MI350P uses a 3 nm process from TSMC; the RTX 4010 uses an 8 nm process from Samsung. Transistor count is 73,000 million versus 8,700 million, and die size is 1190 mm² versus 200 mm². Transistor density is 61.3M per mm² versus 43.5M per mm².

Base clock is 1000 MHz on the MI350P versus 1417 MHz on the RTX 4010. Boost clock is 2200 MHz versus 1762 MHz. Memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective on the MI350P versus 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective on the RTX 4010.

Memory size is 144 GB HBM3e versus 4 GB GDDR6. Bus width is 8192 bit versus 64 bit. Bandwidth is 8.19 TB/s versus 96.00 GB/s.

Shading units are 8192 versus 768. TMUs are 512 versus 24. ROPs are 0 versus 16. The RTX 4010 has 6 RT cores and 24 tensor cores; the MI350P reports none. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s versus 28.19 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 1,126.4 GTexel/s versus 42.29 GTexel/s. FP32 is 36.04 TFLOPS versus 2.706 TFLOPS. FP16 is 36.04 TFLOPS (1:1) on both, but at different absolute levels.

TDP is 600 W versus 50 W. Slot width is dual-slot versus single-slot. The MI350P uses one 16-pin connector; the RTX 4010 uses none. Suggested PSU is 1000 W versus 250 W. Bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are none versus 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. Dimensions differ: 267 mm by 111 mm by 40 mm for the MI350P, versus 163 mm by 69 mm for the RTX 4010. Release dates are 2026-05-06 for the MI350P and 2024-04-15 for the RTX 4010.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350P wins decisively in compute throughput and memory capacity. Its 36.04 TFLOPS FP32 is about 13 times the RTX 4010's 2.706 TFLOPS. Its 144 GB of HBM3e memory with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth is in a different class from the RTX 4010's 4 GB at 96.00 GB/s. The MI350P also has a higher texture rate, 1,126.4 GTexel/s versus 42.29 GTexel/s, and a wider bus interface, PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. This card is positioned for data-heavy compute tasks where memory capacity and bandwidth dominate.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 wins in graphics functionality and power efficiency. It is the only one of the two with display outputs, supporting 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its pixel rate of 28.19 GPixel/s, while modest, is a real capability that the MI350P lacks entirely at 0 MPixel/s. The RTX 4010 also has a much lower TDP at 50 W versus 600 W, requires no power connectors, and fits in a single slot, making it viable for compact or low-power systems. Its 18th percentile ranking in the recorded benchmark shows it is not a high-end performer, but it is functional for rendering workloads.

The RTX 4010 also wins on clock speed at the base level, 1417 MHz versus 1000 MHz, and its memory clock effective rate is 12 Gbps versus 8 Gbps. These figures indicate a design tuned for latency-sensitive graphics tasks rather than sustained throughput. The MI350P's higher boost clock, 2200 MHz versus 1762 MHz, does not compensate for its lack of graphics features.

The database shows no overlap in benchmark results, so the wins are defined by specification and intended use. The MI350P is for compute, the RTX 4010 is for graphics. Each card wins in its respective domain, with no crossover capability.