AMD Instinct MI350P vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Instinct MI350P and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q target entirely different segments of the GPU market, and the recorded data confirms they should not be considered direct substitutes. The MI350P is a dual-slot accelerator with 144 GB of HBM3e memory, an 8192-bit bus, and 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, built on a 3 nm process for the Instinct product line. The RTX 4080 Max-Q is a 60 W integrated graphics processor for portable devices, using 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The MI350P is designed around massive memory capacity and compute throughput, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q is constrained for mobile power envelopes.

From a pure compute standpoint, the MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS of FP32 performance against 20.04 TFLOPS for the RTX 4080 Max-Q. That is a 79.8% advantage for the AMD part. The MI350P also has 8192 shading units to the NVIDIA part's 7424, and the AMD unit does not report pixel rate or ROPs, indicating a compute-oriented design without a traditional raster output stage. The RTX 4080 Max-Q reports 80 ROPs and a pixel rate of 108.0 GPixel/s, confirming it retains a full graphics pipeline. The NVIDIA part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI350P lists no graphics API support. Any user requiring conventional graphics rendering must choose the GeForce part. Any workload demanding memory capacity or raw FP32 throughput will favor the Instinct accelerator.

The percentile ranking for both parts is 50, and both have an average benchmark score of 0, meaning the database has no recorded performance measurements for either unit. The verdict therefore rests on architectural and specification data. The MI350P is the choice for compute-heavy, memory-bound server workloads. The RTX 4080 Max-Q is the choice for a portable device that needs graphics API support and rasterization. The MI350P has no display outputs, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q lists outputs as portable device dependent.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 79.8% higher than the 20.04 TFLOPS recorded for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q.

Q: How much memory does each GPU provide?

A: The MI350P provides 144 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4080 Max-Q provides 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI350P support graphics APIs?

A: The recorded data lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A for the MI350P. The RTX 4080 Max-Q supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two?

A: The MI350P has a TDP of 600 W and uses a single 16-pin power connector with a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has a TDP of 60 W and uses no power connectors, as it is an IGP for portable devices.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and texture units?

A: The MI350P has 8192 shading units and 512 TMUs. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has 7424 shading units, 232 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. The MI350P reports 0 ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s.

Q: What are the process nodes and die sizes?

A: The MI350P is fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 1190 mm² and 73,000 million transistors. The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses a 5 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 294 mm² and 35,800 million transistors.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI350P uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture with a chip designated MI350 128CU. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD104 chip. The two architectures diverge in fundamental design goals. CDNA 4.0 is a compute-focused architecture for the Instinct (MIx) generation, while Ada Lovelace is a graphics-focused architecture for the GeForce 40 Mobile series.

The process nodes differ. The MI350P is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC with a transistor count of 73,000 million on a 1190 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 61.3M per mm². The RTX 4080 Max-Q is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, yielding a higher density of 121.8M per mm². The density difference reflects the distinct design constraints: the MI350P uses a very large die for memory controllers and compute clusters, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q packs a smaller die for mobile integration.

The MI350P has 8192 shading units, 512 TMUs, and reports 0 ROPs with a texture rate of 1,126.4 GTexel/s. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has 7424 shading units, 232 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, with a texture rate of 313.2 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 108.0 GPixel/s. The MI350P includes no RT cores or tensor cores in the recorded data, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q lists 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores. The absence of graphics-specific hardware in the MI350P aligns with its N/A API support. The RTX 4080 Max-Q maintains a full graphics pipeline with ray tracing and tensor hardware.

Memory architecture also differs substantially. The MI350P uses HBM3e with 144 GB on an 8192-bit bus and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses GDDR6 with 12 GB on a 192-bit bus and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI350P memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective. The MI350P's bandwidth advantage is the defining architectural feature. The RTX 4080 Max-Q compensates with higher effective memory speed per pin, but the bus width difference is decisive.

The bus interfaces differ as well. The MI350P uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The MI350P has no display outputs, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q lists portable device dependent outputs. The MI350P is a dual-slot card with dimensions of 267 mm length, 111 mm height, and 40 mm width. The RTX 4080 Max-Q is an IGP with no listed dimensions.

Specification Differences

The clock speeds differ. The MI350P has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has a base clock of 795 MHz and a boost clock of 1350 MHz. The MI350P's boost clock is 63% higher than the RTX 4080 Max-Q's boost clock.

The memory specifications differ completely. The MI350P has 144 GB of HBM3e, an 8192-bit bus, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has 12 GB of GDDR6, a 192-bit bus, and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI350P memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective. The RTX 4080 Max-Q memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

The compute resources differ. The MI350P has 8192 shading units, 512 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has 7424 shading units, 232 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. The MI350P has no RT cores or tensor cores listed, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q has 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores.

The output rates differ. The MI350P reports a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s and a texture rate of 1,126.4 GTexel/s. The RTX 4080 Max-Q reports a pixel rate of 108.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 313.2 GTexel/s.

The power characteristics differ. The MI350P has a TDP of 600 W, a dual-slot form factor, one 16-pin power connector, and a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has a TDP of 60 W, an IGP form factor, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU listed.

The manufacturing data differs. The MI350P uses a 3 nm process with 73,000 million transistors on a 1190 mm² die. The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses a 5 nm process with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. Transistor density is 61.3M per mm² for the MI350P and 121.8M per mm² for the RTX 4080 Max-Q.

The release dates differ. The MI350P has a release date of 2026-05-06, and the RTX 4080 Max-Q has a release date of 2023-01-02. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has a production status of Active, while the MI350P has no production status listed. The RTX 4080 Max-Q lists its predecessor as GeForce 30 Mobile and successor as GeForce 50 Mobile. The MI350P lists its predecessor as Radeon Instinct and no successor.

The FP32 and FP16 values are identical within each part. The MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 with a 1:1 ratio. The RTX 4080 Max-Q delivers 20.04 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 with a 1:1 ratio.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No head-to-head benchmark results are recorded in the database for this pair. Both parts have an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs. The absence of measured data means the analysis must rely on the recorded architectural and specification differences.

The largest computational win for the MI350P is in FP32 throughput. The MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS against 20.04 TFLOPS for the RTX 4080 Max-Q. That is a 79.8% advantage. The FP16 figures follow the same pattern, with the MI350P at 36.04 TFLOPS and the RTX 4080 Max-Q at 20.04 TFLOPS.

The texture rate favors the MI350P by a wide margin. The MI350P reports 1,126.4 GTexel/s, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q reports 313.2 GTexel/s. The MI350P is 259.6% higher in texture throughput. This result follows from the MI350P's 512 TMUs and higher boost clock of 2200 MHz versus 1350 MHz.

The pixel rate favors the RTX 4080 Max-Q. The MI350P reports 0 MPixel/s, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q reports 108.0 GPixel/s. The MI350P has no ROPs, so it cannot produce a pixel output. The RTX 4080 Max-Q retains 80 ROPs and a functional raster pipeline.

Memory bandwidth strongly favors the MI350P. The MI350P provides 8.19 TB/s against 432.0 GB/s for the RTX 4080 Max-Q. That is an 18.0x difference in favor of the AMD part. Memory capacity also favors the MI350P: 144 GB versus 12 GB, a 12.0x difference.

The power envelope favors the RTX 4080 Max-Q. The NVIDIA part runs at 60 W TDP, while the MI350P runs at 600 W TDP. That is a 10.0x difference in favor of the NVIDIA part. The RTX 4080 Max-Q also requires no power connectors and no PSU recommendation, while the MI350P requires a 16-pin connector and a 1000 W PSU.

The form factor favors the RTX 4080 Max-Q for mobile use. The NVIDIA part is an IGP with no dimensions listed, while the MI350P is a dual-slot card at 267 mm length, 111 mm height, and 40 mm width. The MI350P cannot fit in a portable device, and the RTX 4080 Max-Q cannot provide the MI350P's compute or memory resources.

The transistor density favors the RTX 4080 Max-Q. The NVIDIA part achieves 121.8M transistors per mm² on a 294 mm² die, while the MI350P achieves 61.3M per mm² on a 1190 mm² die. The MI350P's lower density reflects the large HBM3e memory controllers and the 8192-bit bus that dominate the die area.

The API support is exclusive to the RTX 4080 Max-Q. The NVIDIA part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI350P lists N/A for all three APIs. Any workload requiring these APIs must use the NVIDIA part. The MI350P has no display outputs, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q has portable device dependent outputs.

The release timing differs by over three years. The RTX 4080 Max-Q was released on 2023-01-02 and remains in Active production. The MI350P has a release date of 2026-05-06. The RTX 4080 Max-Q sits between GeForce 30 Mobile and GeForce 50 Mobile in its lineage. The MI350P follows Radeon Instinct with no successor recorded.

The data confirms two distinct products. The MI350P leads in FP32 compute by 79.8%, texture rate by 259.6%, memory bandwidth by 18.0x, and memory capacity by 12.0x. The RTX 4080 Max-Q leads in pixel rate, API support, power efficiency, and portability. The recorded information does not include any benchmark scores, so these specification-based comparisons represent the full extent of the available analysis.