AMD Instinct MI350X vs AMD Radeon 680M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350X and the AMD Radeon 680M occupy entirely different segments of the GPU spectrum, and the recorded data reflects this split clearly. The MI350X is a compute accelerator with no display outputs, no graphics API support, and an empty benchmark record. It does not compete in rendering workloads because it cannot output frames or run DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan applications. The Radeon 680M, by contrast, is an integrated graphics processor with full API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and it carries three recorded benchmark scores.

The wins are therefore categorical rather than numerical. The Radeon 680M wins every measurable graphics benchmark simply because it has them. Its average benchmark score sits at 15,270, and its percentile rank among all GPUs is 57. The Instinct MI350X has an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50, which places it in the same percentile band as the 680M despite having no test results. That oddity stems from the database's handling of unmeasured hardware, not from actual performance equivalence.

In compute-oriented terms, the MI350X wins on raw throughput specifications. Its FP32 figure of 72.09 TFLOPS dwarfs the 680M's 3.379 TFLOPS. The texture rate tells a similar story: 2,252.8 GTexel/s against 105.6 GTexel/s. The pixel rate reverses direction, with the 680M delivering 70.40 GPixel/s while the MI350X records 0 MPixel/s, a consequence of having no raster output units. The MI350X lists 0 ROPs, while the 680M has 32. The MI350X has no display outputs, making it useless for any graphics workload that requires a framebuffer.

Architecture Differences

The two chips share a manufacturer but diverge in nearly every architectural decision. The Instinct MI350X uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC with 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 77.7 million per square millimeter. The Radeon 680M uses RDNA 2.0, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 6 nm node, with 13,100 million transistors across a 208 mm² die, for a density of 63.0 million per square millimeter. The MI350X die is more than eleven times larger and packs over fourteen times the transistor count.

The MI350X chip is labeled "MI350 256CU" and belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation, with its predecessor listed as Radeon Instinct. The 680M carries the "Rembrandt+" chip, is part of the Navi II IGP generation, and has both a predecessor (Vega II IGP) and a successor (Navi III IGP). The MI350X lists no successor and no production status field.

Memory architecture separates the two dramatically. The MI350X uses 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The 680M uses system shared memory, with its bus width and type both marked as system shared and bandwidth described as system dependent. The MI350X memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective, while the 680M simply references system shared memory without a dedicated clock.

The compute configurations differ by an order of magnitude. The MI350X contains 16,384 shading units and 1,024 texture mapping units. The 680M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and additionally lists 12 ray tracing cores, a feature the MI350X leaves null. The MI350X has no RT cores listed, no tensor cores listed, and zero ROPs. The 680M has 32 ROPs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, so no direct paired measurements exist between these two products. The only benchmark data available belongs to the Radeon 680M. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 378. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 23,468. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 21,965. These three results produce an average benchmark score of 15,270.

The nearest rivals for the 680M provide context for its position. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 averages 15,283, which is 0.1% below the 680M. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 also averages 15,290, again 0.1% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM averages 15,199, putting it 0.5% above the 680M. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 averages 15,171, which is 0.7% higher than the 680M. These deltas place the 680M in a tight cluster where the spread between the lowest and highest rival is less than one percent.

The MI350X has no nearest rivals, no benchmark scores, and no average score beyond zero. Its percentile of 50 against all GPUs is a default placement rather than a measured result. Any comparison between the two parts on benchmark data alone collapses into a single-sided analysis: only the 680M has measurable results, and only the 680M has rivals to position against.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The Instinct MI350X records 72.09 TFLOPS in FP32, while the Radeon 680M records 3.379 TFLOPS. The MI350X figure is roughly 21 times higher.

Q: Does the Radeon 680M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the 680M lists 12 ray tracing cores as part of its RDNA 2.0 architecture. The Instinct MI350X does not list any RT cores.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The MI350X uses 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The 680M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has display outputs?

A: The 680M has display outputs described as portable device dependent. The MI350X lists no outputs.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The MI350X is built on a 3 nm process, while the 680M uses a 6 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

Q: How does the Radeon 680M compare to the GeForce RTX 2060 in average benchmark score?

A: The 680M averages 15,270, while the RTX 2060 averages 15,290. The RTX 2060 is 0.1% higher.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across every major specification category. The MI350X uses CDNA 4.0 architecture on a 3 nm node, while the 680M uses RDNA 2.0 on a 6 nm node. Transistor counts are 185,000 million for the MI350X and 13,100 million for the 680M. Die sizes are 2380 mm² and 208 mm², respectively, yielding densities of 77.7M per mm² and 63.0M per mm².

Base clocks differ: the MI350X runs at 1000 MHz, while the 680M runs at 2000 MHz. Both share a 2200 MHz boost clock. The MI350X memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective, while the 680M uses system shared memory. Memory capacity is 288 GB of HBM3e for the MI350X versus system shared for the 680M. Bus width is 8192 bit versus system shared. Bandwidth is 8.19 TB/s versus system dependent.

Shading units number 16,384 for the MI350X and 768 for the 680M. TMUs are 1,024 versus 48. ROPs are 0 versus 32. RT cores are null for the MI350X and 12 for the 680M. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s versus 70.40 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus 105.6 GTexel/s. FP32 is 72.09 TFLOPS versus 3.379 TFLOPS. FP16 is 72.09 TFLOPS (1:1) for the MI350X and 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1) for the 680M.

TDP is 1000 W for the MI350X and 50 W for the 680M. Slot width is OAM Module for the MI350X and IGP for the 680M. The MI350X suggests a 1400 W PSU; the 680M lists no suggested PSU. Bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 for the MI350X and PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 680M. Display outputs are none for the MI350X and portable device dependent for the 680M.

API support differs completely. The MI350X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The 680M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Dimensions exist only for the MI350X: 102 mm length and 165 mm width. The 680M has no recorded dimensions.

Release dates are June 11, 2025 for the MI350X and January 2, 2023 for the 680M. The MI350X lists Radeon Instinct as its predecessor and no successor. The 680M lists Vega II IGP as its predecessor and Navi III IGP as its successor. The 680M has an active production status; the MI350X does not list one. Neither part has a launch MSRP in the database.

The Verdict

The data separates these two products into distinct roles without ambiguity. The Instinct MI350X is a compute accelerator with massive throughput specifications: 72.09 TFLOPS FP32, 8.19 TB/s memory bandwidth, 288 GB of HBM3e, and 16,384 shading units. It has no display outputs, no graphics API support, and no measured benchmarks. Its zero ROP count and 0 MPixel/s pixel rate confirm it cannot rasterize frames. Any selection of this part must be for compute workloads that do not require graphics output.

The Radeon 680M is an integrated GPU with full graphics capabilities, including DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4, and 12 ray tracing cores. Its three benchmark scores position it within a tight competitive cluster: the GeForce RTX 2060 is 0.1% behind it, the GeForce GTX 580 is 0.1% behind it, the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is 0.5% ahead, and the Radeon RX 7600 is 0.7% ahead. Its 50 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for portable devices with system shared memory.

The choice between them rests on the workload. A system requiring rendering, ray tracing, or display output must use the 680M, as the MI350X cannot perform those functions. A system requiring maximum compute throughput with HBM3e memory and PCIe 5.0 connectivity must use the MI350X, as the 680M lacks the bandwidth, capacity, and raw FP32 throughput. The MI350X offers roughly 21 times the FP32 performance of the 680M but carries a 1000 W TDP and no graphics pipeline. The 680M offers graphics and API compatibility at a fraction of the power draw. Neither part substitutes for the other.