AMD Instinct MI350P vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Instinct MI350P and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile. The MI350P has no recorded benchmark scores, a zero average benchmark score, and sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs. The RTX 4080 Mobile, by contrast, has nine recorded benchmark results, an average score of 38,135, and ranks at the 81st percentile.

The RTX 4080 Mobile's recorded scores show a clear profile. Its strongest result is in Geekbench OpenCL at 159,575, followed by Geekbench Vulkan at 145,807. In Passmark tests, the graphics 3D score is 24,926, while the GPU compute score is 11,191. DirectX results are lower: DirectX 9 scores 286, DirectX 11 scores 244, DirectX 10 scores 157, and DirectX 12 scores 96. The graphics 2D score is 929.

Since the MI350P has no benchmarks, the only quantitative comparison available comes from the RTX 4080 Mobile's nearest rivals. The RTX 4080 Mobile sits within a tight cluster. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 by 0.4%, with the MX570 averaging 38,299. It also trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile by 0.6%, which averages 38,349. Conversely, it leads the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 by 1.3%, which averages 37,648, and the NVIDIA Tesla P4 by 1.3%, which averages 37,628. These deltas are minor, indicating that the RTX 4080 Mobile performs essentially on par with these four cards in aggregate scoring.

What the data implies is a split between two very different product categories. The MI350P is a data center accelerator with zero recorded consumer-oriented benchmarks. The RTX 4080 Mobile is a laptop GPU with a full suite of DirectX and compute tests. Without shared benchmarks, no direct performance comparison can be made from the measurements. The only conclusion supported by the recorded data is that the RTX 4080 Mobile occupies a competitive position among mobile and entry desktop parts, while the MI350P's performance remains unquantified in this database.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI350P have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The MI350P has an empty benchmark list, an average benchmark score of zero, and no nearest rivals recorded. Its percentile rank is 50, which reflects the absence of measured data rather than a performance level.

Q: What is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile's strongest benchmark result?

A: The strongest recorded score is in Geekbench OpenCL at 159,575. The next highest is Geekbench Vulkan at 145,807. Among Passmark tests, the graphics 3D score of 24,926 is the highest.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 Mobile compare to its closest rivals?

A: The RTX 4080 Mobile is nearly tied with four GPUs. It trails the MX570 by 0.4% and the RTX 5080 Mobile by 0.6%. It leads the RTX 4070 and Tesla P4 by 1.3% each. All four rivals have average scores between 37,628 and 38,349.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile has a transistor density of 121.8M per mm², which is higher than the AMD Instinct MI350P's 61.3M per mm². The RTX 4080 Mobile achieves this with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the MI350P uses 73,000 million transistors on a 1190 mm² die.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: No. The RTX 4080 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI350P lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating no consumer API support in the recorded data.

Q: What are the memory configurations of these two GPUs?

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

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural lineages. The AMD Instinct MI350P uses CDNA 4.0 architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile uses Ada Lovelace architecture, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 5 nm process. The MI350P is part of AMD's Instinct (MIx) generation, while the RTX 4080 Mobile belongs to the GeForce 40 Mobile series.

The chip designs diverge sharply. The MI350P is built around the MI350 128CU chip, a massive die measuring 1190 mm² with 73,000 million transistors. The RTX 4080 Mobile uses the AD104 chip, which is 294 mm² and contains 35,800 million transistors. Despite the MI350P's larger transistor count, its transistor density is lower at 61.3M per mm² versus 121.8M per mm² for the RTX 4080 Mobile. This reflects the MI350P's focus on memory bandwidth and compute throughput rather than dense logic.

Core configurations differ in type and count. The MI350P has 8,192 shading units and 512 texture mapping units, but its pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s and it has 0 ROPs. This indicates a compute-oriented design with no raster output stage. The RTX 4080 Mobile has 7,424 shading units, 232 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 133.2 GPixel/s. The RTX 4080 Mobile also features 58 ray tracing cores and 232 tensor cores, while the MI350P lists no RT cores and no tensor cores in its specifications.

Memory architecture reinforces the divergence. The MI350P uses HBM3e memory with 144 GB capacity, an 8192-bit bus, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4080 Mobile uses GDDR6 with 12 GB capacity, a 192-bit bus, and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI350P's memory bandwidth is roughly 19 times higher, which supports its intended role in memory-bound workloads. The RTX 4080 Mobile's memory subsystem is conventional for a laptop GPU.

Compute rates also differ. The MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio). The RTX 4080 Mobile delivers 24.72 TFLOPS for FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio). The MI350P leads by 11.32 TFLOPS in both precisions. Texture rates follow a similar pattern: the MI350P achieves 1,126.4 GTexel/s, while the RTX 4080 Mobile achieves 386.3 GTexel/s.

The MI350P has no display outputs and no consumer API support, while the RTX 4080 Mobile provides portable device dependent outputs and full DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support. This confirms that the MI350P is an accelerator without graphics output, whereas the RTX 4080 Mobile is a graphics-capable mobile processor.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI350P | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | CDNA 4.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process node | 3 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 73,000 million | 35,800 million |

| Die size | 1190 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor density | 61.3M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1000 MHz | 1290 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2200 MHz | 1665 MHz |

| Memory clock | 2000 MHz, 8 Gbps effective | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 144 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory type | HBM3e | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus width | 8192 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 8.19 TB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 8192 | 7424 |

| TMUs | 512 | 232 |

| ROPs | 0 | 80 |

| RT cores | None | 58 |

| Tensor cores | None | 232 |

| Pixel rate | 0 MPixel/s | 133.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 1,126.4 GTexel/s | 386.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 36.04 TFLOPS | 24.72 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 36.04 TFLOPS (1:1) | 24.72 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 600 W | 110 W |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power connectors | 1x 16-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 1000 W | None |

| Bus interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Release date | 2026-05-06 | 2023-01-02 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | GeForce 30 Mobile |

| Successor | None | GeForce 50 Mobile |

| Production status | Not recorded | Active |

The Verdict

The data describes two products with almost no overlap in purpose. The AMD Instinct MI350P is a 600 W, dual-slot accelerator with 144 GB of HBM3e memory, no display outputs, and no consumer API support. It is designed for compute workloads that require massive memory capacity and bandwidth. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile is a 110 W integrated graphics processor for laptops, with 12 GB of GDDR6, full DirectX 12 Ultimate support, ray tracing cores, and tensor cores.

Benchmark data is one-sided. The RTX 4080 Mobile has scores across nine tests and a percentile rank of 81. The MI350P has no scores and a percentile rank of 50, which is the default for unmeasured parts. The RTX 4080 Mobile's nearest rivals show it performs within 1.3% of the MX570, RTX 5080 Mobile, RTX 4070, and Tesla P4 in average score. This places it in a competitive mid-range cluster, but none of those rivals approach the MI350P's specifications.

The MI350P's compute specifications are uniformly higher in raw throughput. It has 8,192 shading units versus 7,424, a texture rate of 1,126.4 GTexel/s versus 386.3, and FP32 of 36.04 TFLOPS versus 24.72. Its memory bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s is an order of magnitude above the RTX 4080 Mobile's 432.0 GB/s. However, the MI350P cannot render graphics, has no API support, and consumes 600 W, making it unsuitable for any client-side use.

The RTX 4080 Mobile, conversely, is a complete graphics solution. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, has display outputs, and fits within a laptop power envelope. Its 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores enable ray tracing and AI acceleration, features the MI350P does not list.

Which product to choose depends entirely on the workload category. The MI350P is the only option for server-side compute with huge memory pools. The RTX 4080 Mobile is the only option for mobile graphics and consumer API workloads. The database provides no shared benchmarks to bridge these categories.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350P wins in every raw compute metric recorded. Its FP32 and FP16 throughput of 36.04 TFLOPS exceeds the RTX 4080 Mobile's 24.72 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 1,126.4 GTexel/s is nearly three times higher. Its memory bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s dwarfs the 432.0 GB/s of the RTX 4080 Mobile. Its 144 GB memory capacity is twelve times larger. These figures point to workloads involving large datasets, high-bandwidth streaming, and sustained compute.

The MI350P also wins on process node, using 3 nm versus 5 nm, and on bus interface, supporting PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Its base clock is lower at 1000 MHz versus 1290 MHz, but its boost clock is higher at 2200 MHz versus 1665 MHz. The MI350P's power envelope of 600 W and suggested PSU of 1000 W indicate a fixed installation, not a portable device.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile wins in every graphics-oriented category. It has 80 ROPs and a pixel rate of 133.2 GPixel/s, while the MI350P has 0 ROPs and 0 MPixel/s. It includes 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores, neither of which the MI350P lists. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI350P lists N/A for all three. It has display outputs, whereas the MI350P has none.

The RTX 4080 Mobile also wins on efficiency metrics. Its TDP is 110 W versus 600 W, it requires no power connectors, and it has no suggested PSU. Its transistor density is 121.8M per mm² versus 61.3M per mm², indicating more efficient use of silicon area. Its base clock is higher, and its memory clock is faster at 18 Gbps effective versus 8 Gbps effective, though its bus is far narrower.

The benchmark record supports the RTX 4080 Mobile in practical terms. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 159,575 and Vulkan score of 145,807 demonstrate real-world compute capability. Its Passmark graphics 3D score of 24,926 shows rasterization performance. None of these tests exist for the MI350P.

The use-case split is clear from the specifications. The MI350P serves data center compute, scientific simulation, and memory-bound acceleration. The RTX 4080 Mobile serves laptop gaming, content creation, and any workload requiring graphics output or consumer API support. The database records no scenario where both products compete directly.