AMD Instinct MI350X vs AMD Radeon PRO V710 Comparison

The AMD Instinct MI350X and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 serve opposite ends of the accelerator spectrum. The MI350X is a massive compute module built for scale-out AI and HPC workloads, while the Radeon PRO V710 is a single-slot, low-power workstation accelerator. The recorded data shows a clear division of labor: the MI350X delivers extreme FP32 and memory throughput with no display output, while the V710 provides a full API stack, ray tracing cores, and a conventional PCIe slot format. Neither card is a general-purpose gaming GPU, and the benchmark results reflect their different design targets.

Where Each One Wins

The MI350X wins outright in raw compute density and memory capacity. Its FP32 rating of 72.09 TFLOPS more than doubles the V710’s 27.65 TFLOPS, and its 288 GB of HBM3e memory dwarfs the V710’s 28 GB of GDDR6. The texture rate of 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus 432.0 GTexel/s reinforces this gap. For any workload that scales with raw shader throughput, such as large matrix operations or dense inference batches, the MI350X is the clear choice.

The V710 wins in operational flexibility and rendering features. It carries 54 ray tracing cores, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and fits in a single PCIe slot with a single 8-pin power connector. The MI350X, by contrast, exposes no display outputs and lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support. The V710 also has a much lower power envelope at 158 W, compared to the MI350X’s 1000 W, and its pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s indicates real rasterization capability, while the MI350X’s pixel rate is listed as 0 MPixel/s.

The V710 holds the edge in benchmark presence. The database contains two recorded tests for the V710: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 853 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 116460. The MI350X has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, giving it a percentile rank of 50 versus the V710’s 88. This means the V710’s measured results place it ahead of 88% of all GPUs in the database, while the MI350X sits at the median with zero data points.

Architecture Differences

The MI350X uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture on a 3 nm TSMC process, while the V710 uses RDNA 3.0 on a 5 nm TSMC process. The MI350X is built from the MI350 256CU chip, which contains 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 77.7M per mm². The V710 uses the Navi 32 chip with 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, achieving a higher density of 81.2M per mm². Despite the larger process node, the V710 packs transistors slightly tighter per square millimeter.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The MI350X employs 288 GB of HBM3e across an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The V710 uses 28 GB of GDDR6 across a 224-bit bus, producing 504.0 GB/s. The MI350X’s memory bandwidth is roughly 16 times higher, and its capacity is over 10 times greater. The MI350X runs its memory at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective), while the V710 runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), but the V710’s narrower bus limits total throughput.

Compute unit organization also differs. The MI350X contains 16384 shading units, 1024 TMUs, and no ROPs, reflective of a compute-focused design. The V710 contains 3456 shading units, 216 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, plus 54 ray tracing cores. The MI350X has no listed RT cores or tensor cores. Clock behavior is inverted: the MI350X has a 1000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the V710 has a 1900 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. The V710 runs at higher clocks throughout, but the MI350X compensates with a far larger shader array.

Power and physical formats differ sharply. The MI350X is an OAM module with no power connectors, a 1000 W TDP, and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. Its dimensions are 102 mm in length and 165 mm in width. The V710 is a single-slot card with one 8-pin connector, a 158 W TDP, and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The MI350X uses PCIe 5.0 x16; the V710 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The MI350X has no display outputs; the V710 also lists no display outputs, making both unsuitable for direct monitor connection.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the MI350X and the V710. The MI350X’s benchmark array is empty, and its average benchmark score is 0. The V710’s average benchmark score is 58657, based on its two recorded tests. The MI350X therefore has no measured wins in the head-to-head table, and the V710 also has zero wins because no shared tests exist.

The V710’s nearest rivals provide context for its measured performance. The NVIDIA P102-100 sits 0.2% ahead with an average score of 58528, the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT is 0.5% behind at 58392, the Intel Arc A570M trails by 0.7% at 58239, and the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM is 1% behind at 58085. These deltas are small, indicating that the V710’s average score of 58657 places it in a tightly clustered performance band around 58,000 to 58,600 points. The V710’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 116460 is its strongest single result, while its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 853 is a modest rendering figure.

Without MI350X benchmark data, the only quantitative comparison available is theoretical compute. The MI350X’s FP32 of 72.09 TFLOPS is 2.6 times the V710’s 27.65 TFLOPS. Its FP16 output is identical to its FP32 output at 72.09 TFLOPS (1:1), and the V710 also matches FP16 to FP32 at 27.65 TFLOPS (1:1). In memory bandwidth, the MI350X’s 8.19 TB/s exceeds the V710’s 504.0 GB/s by a factor of about 16. The MI350X’s texture rate of 2,252.8 GTexel/s is 5.2 times the V710’s 432.0 GTexel/s. These ratios define the performance gap in compute-heavy scenarios.

The V710’s pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s is a meaningful advantage for any rasterization task, since the MI350X lists 0 MPixel/s. The MI350X has no ROPs, confirming it cannot perform traditional pixel output. The V710’s 96 ROPs give it a real, if modest, rendering capability. The MI350X compensates with a 1000 MHz base clock and 2200 MHz boost, but those clocks drive a massive shader array, not a raster pipeline.

The Verdict

The data points to the MI350X for compute-first installations that prioritize FP32 throughput, memory capacity, and bandwidth above all else. Its 72.09 TFLOPS, 288 GB HBM3e, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth make it the superior accelerator for large-scale numerical workloads. The 1000 W TDP and OAM form factor indicate a server-class component designed for a chassis with dedicated power delivery, not a desktop tower. The absence of display outputs and API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan means it is not a rendering card.

The V710 is the better choice for systems that need a standard PCIe card with manageable power draw and broad API compatibility. Its 158 W TDP, single-slot design, and 1x 8-pin connector allow installation in conventional workstations. The 54 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support give it a role in real-time visualization or GPU compute tasks that use those APIs. Its 28 GB of GDDR6 memory and 504.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for mid-size datasets, and its 88th percentile ranking in the database shows competitive measured performance against its nearest rivals.

Users who require both high compute and standard software stacks face a trade-off. The MI350X offers more than twice the FP32 performance and over 16 times the memory bandwidth, but it cannot run DirectX or Vulkan workloads. The V710 offers a fraction of that compute but carries full API support and ray tracing. The MI350X’s 50th percentile ranking reflects missing data, not weak performance; the V710’s 88th percentile reflects two actual benchmark runs. For pure compute density, the MI350X wins decisively. For general-purpose workstation acceleration with rendering features, the V710 wins.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Radeon PRO V710 delivers 27.65 TFLOPS FP32. The MI350X is 2.6 times faster in this metric.

Q: Does either card support display outputs?

A: No. Both the MI350X and the V710 list no display outputs. The MI350X additionally lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A, while the V710 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the memory capacity and bandwidth difference?

A: The MI350X has 288 GB of HBM3e with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth on an 8192-bit bus. The V710 has 28 GB of GDDR6 with 504.0 GB/s bandwidth on a 224-bit bus.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The MI350X has a 1000 W TDP and suggests a 1400 W PSU, with no power connectors because it is an OAM module. The V710 has a 158 W TDP, suggests a 450 W PSU, and uses a single 8-pin connector.

Q: Does the V710 have ray tracing support?

A: Yes. The V710 includes 54 ray tracing cores. The MI350X lists no RT cores in the database.

Q: What benchmark scores does the V710 have?

A: The V710 scored 853 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and 116460 in Geekbench OpenCL, giving it an average score of 58657 and an 88th percentile ranking. The MI350X has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI350X | AMD Radeon PRO V710 |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 4.0 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 185,000 million | 28,100 million |

| Die Size | 2380 mm² | 346 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 77.7M / mm² | 81.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1900 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2200 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Memory Size | 288 GB | 28 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3e | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 224 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 8.19 TB/s | 504.0 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz | 2250 MHz |

| Shading Units | 16384 | 3456 |

| TMUs | 1024 | 216 |

| ROPs | 0 | 96 |

| RT Cores | null | 54 |

| FP32 | 72.09 TFLOPS | 27.65 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 72.09 TFLOPS (1:1) | 27.65 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,252.8 GTexel/s | 432.0 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 1000 W | 158 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 1400 W | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | No outputs |

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

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2025-06-11 | 2024-10-02 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | Radeon Pro Vega |