AMD Instinct MI350P vs NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU Comparison

The AMD Instinct MI350P and the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU occupy opposite extremes of the hardware spectrum, and the recorded database specifications confirm this immediately. One is a 600 W dual-slot accelerator aimed at compute workloads, the other a 40 W console chip designed for a handheld gaming system. The head-to-head comparison is not close on any major metric, but the analysis is still useful for understanding why each part exists.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database lists no direct benchmark scores for either GPU, with both parts showing an average benchmark score of 0 and an identical percentile ranking of 50 among all GPUs. The comparison must therefore rely entirely on the recorded compute, memory, and output specifications.

The most decisive gap appears in raw floating point performance. The AMD Instinct MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU delivers 4.301 TFLOPS. That puts the AMD part at roughly 8.4 times the FP32 throughput of the NVIDIA chip. The delta is so large that no workload involving dense FP32 math would be remotely comparable between the two.

The FP16 comparison shifts slightly but still favors AMD heavily. The MI350P provides 36.04 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 1:1 ratio relative to FP32, meaning it does not gain any extra throughput by switching to reduced precision. The Switch 2 GPU provides 8.602 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, meaning it doubles its throughput relative to FP32. Even with that advantage, the Switch 2 GPU reaches only 23.9% of the MI350P's FP16 output.

Memory bandwidth is another area of total dominance. The MI350P uses 144 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192 bit bus, producing 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The Switch 2 GPU uses 12 GB of LPDDR5X on a 128 bit bus, producing 102.4 GB/s. The AMD part offers 80 times the bandwidth. The memory capacity difference is 12 times in favor of AMD.

Texture and pixel rates follow the same pattern. The MI350P achieves 1,126.4 GTexel/s, compared to 67.20 GTexel/s for the Switch 2 GPU. That is a 16.8 times difference in texture fill. The pixel rate is the one metric where the NVIDIA part has a recorded value and the AMD part does not: the Switch 2 GPU achieves 22.40 GPixel/s, while the MI350P is listed at 0 MPixel/s with no functional ROP count. The MI350P has 0 ROPs recorded, which explains the zero pixel rate. The Switch 2 GPU has 16 ROPs.

The clock speeds tell an interesting story about design philosophy. The MI350P runs at a 1000 MHz base clock and a 2200 MHz boost clock. The Switch 2 GPU runs at a 561 MHz base clock and a 1400 MHz boost clock. The AMD chip is faster at both the floor and the ceiling, but it also consumes far more power. The TDP figures are 600 W for the MI350P and 40 W for the Switch 2 GPU, a 15 times difference in power draw.

The transistor count and die size show the manufacturing gap. The MI350P uses 73,000 million transistors on a 1190 mm² die, fabricated on TSMC's 3 nm process. The Switch 2 GPU uses an 8 nm Samsung process with a 200 mm² die, and its transistor count is listed as unknown. The MI350P's transistor density is recorded as 61.3 million transistors per square millimeter, while the Switch 2 GPU has no density figure recorded.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two GPUs are not competitors in any practical sense. The AMD Instinct MI350P is a compute accelerator with no display outputs, no graphics API support listed, and a power envelope that requires a 1000 W suggested power supply. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU is a console chip with DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, and it can run within a 40 W power budget.

A buyer or system integrator choosing between them would be making a decision based on workload type, not performance level. For FP32 compute, FP16 compute, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, or texture throughput, the MI350P is the only viable option. For graphics rendering, API compatibility, or power-constrained deployment, the Switch 2 GPU is the only one with the recorded features to function.

The percentile rankings do not help differentiate them, since both are listed at the 50th percentile with no benchmark scores. The absence of recorded benchmarks means the database cannot confirm real-world performance, but the specification deltas are large enough to make the relative positioning clear.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers, different foundries, and different process nodes. AMD builds the MI350P on TSMC's 3 nm process, while NVIDIA builds the Switch 2 GPU on Samsung's 8 nm process. The 3 nm node allows AMD to pack 73,000 million transistors into a 1190 mm² die, which produces a density of 61.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The Switch 2 GPU uses a 200 mm² die, and its transistor count is not recorded.

The architecture generations are also distinct. The MI350P uses CDNA 4.0, AMD's compute-oriented architecture, while the Switch 2 GPU uses Ampere, NVIDIA's graphics-focused architecture. The chip identifiers reflect this: the MI350P uses the MI350 128CU chip, and the Switch 2 GPU uses the GA10B chip.

Shader and fixed-function hardware differ sharply. The MI350P has 8192 shading units and 512 TMUs, but 0 ROPs. The Switch 2 GPU has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The MI350P has no recorded RT cores or tensor cores. The Switch 2 GPU has 12 RT cores and 48 tensor cores.

The API support is a fundamental architectural split. The MI350P lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The Switch 2 GPU lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This makes the AMD part unusable for conventional graphics workloads that rely on those APIs, while the NVIDIA part is fully specified for them.

Memory architecture follows the compute versus graphics divide. The MI350P uses HBM3e with an 8192 bit bus, which explains its 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The Switch 2 GPU uses LPDDR5X with a 128 bit bus, which explains its 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The MI350P's memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective speed, while the Switch 2 GPU runs at 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective speed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P records 36.04 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU records 4.301 TFLOPS. The AMD part is approximately 8.4 times faster in this metric.

Q: Do either of these GPUs support standard graphics APIs?

A: Only the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU does. It lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD Instinct MI350P lists N/A for all three APIs.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P has a 600 W TDP and a 1000 W suggested power supply. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU has a 40 W TDP and no suggested power supply listed.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have, and what type?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P has 144 GB of HBM3e memory. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU has 12 GB of LPDDR5X memory.

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI350P have ray tracing or tensor cores?

A: The database records no RT cores and no tensor cores for the MI350P. The Switch 2 GPU records 12 RT cores and 48 tensor cores.

Q: What is the launch date for each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU has a release date of 2025-06-04. The AMD Instinct MI350P has a release date of 2026-05-06.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350P wins in every raw compute and memory metric recorded in the database. Its FP32 throughput of 36.04 TFLOPS dwarfs the Switch 2 GPU's 4.301 TFLOPS. Its FP16 throughput of 36.04 TFLOPS exceeds the Switch 2 GPU's 8.602 TFLOPS. Its 8.19 TB/s of memory bandwidth is 80 times the Switch 2 GPU's 102.4 GB/s. Its 144 GB of memory capacity is 12 times the Switch 2 GPU's 12 GB. Its texture rate of 1,126.4 GTexel/s is 16.8 times the Switch 2 GPU's 67.20 GTexel/s. The MI350P also has a wider memory bus at 8192 bit versus 128 bit, and it uses the more advanced TSMC 3 nm process.

The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU wins in the categories that matter for a functioning graphics device. It has 16 ROPs and a recorded pixel rate of 22.40 GPixel/s, while the MI350P has 0 ROPs and a 0 MPixel/s pixel rate. It has 12 RT cores and 48 tensor cores, while the MI350P has none recorded. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI350P supports none of those APIs. It consumes 40 W of power versus 600 W, making it viable for portable or low-power systems. It is also substantially smaller in width at 14 mm versus 40 mm, with a shorter length of 272 mm versus 267 mm for the MI350P.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every recorded field. The AMD Instinct MI350P uses a 3 nm TSMC process; the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU uses an 8 nm Samsung process. The MI350P has 73,000 million transistors; the Switch 2 GPU has an unknown transistor count. The MI350P die measures 1190 mm²; the Switch 2 GPU die measures 200 mm². Transistor density is 61.3 million per mm² for the MI350P and not recorded for the Switch 2 GPU.

Clock speeds differ: the MI350P runs at 1000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the Switch 2 GPU runs at 561 MHz base and 1400 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective for the MI350P and 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective for the Switch 2 GPU.

Memory specifications diverge completely: 144 GB of HBM3e on an 8192 bit bus for the MI350P, versus 12 GB of LPDDR5X on a 128 bit bus for the Switch 2 GPU. Bandwidth is 8.19 TB/s versus 102.4 GB/s.

Compute units differ: 8192 shading units, 512 TMUs, and 0 ROPs for the MI350P, versus 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs for the Switch 2 GPU. The MI350P has no RT cores or tensor cores; the Switch 2 GPU has 12 RT cores and 48 tensor cores.

Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for the MI350P and 22.40 GPixel/s for the Switch 2 GPU. Texture rate is 1,126.4 GTexel/s versus 67.20 GTexel/s. FP32 is 36.04 TFLOPS versus 4.301 TFLOPS. FP16 is 36.04 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio versus 8.602 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio.

Power and physical dimensions also differ. The MI350P has a 600 W TDP, a dual-slot width, a single 16-pin power connector, and a 1000 W suggested PSU. The Switch 2 GPU has a 40 W TDP, no slot width recorded, no power connectors recorded, and no suggested PSU. The MI350P measures 267 mm by 111 mm by 40 mm. The Switch 2 GPU measures 272 mm by 116 mm by 14 mm. The MI350P uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface; the Switch 2 GPU has no bus interface recorded.

The release dates place the Switch 2 GPU first at 2025-06-04, followed by the MI350P at 2026-05-06. The Switch 2 GPU has an active production status, while the MI350P has none recorded. The Switch 2 GPU has a recorded launch MSRP of 449 USD, while the MI350P has no launch MSRP listed. The MI350P lists Radeon Instinct as its predecessor, while the Switch 2 GPU has no predecessor recorded. Both parts have no display outputs, making external video output impossible for either without additional hardware.