AMD Instinct MI350X vs AMD Radeon RX 7600M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350X and the AMD Radeon RX 7600M occupy entirely separate performance classes, and the recorded data reflects this divide. The MI350X is an accelerator built for compute-density workloads, while the RX 7600M is a mobile graphics processor. In the database, the MI350X has no benchmark entries, zero wins, and a percentile ranking of 50 among all GPUs. The RX 7600M has a single recorded benchmark, one win, and sits in the 89th percentile. These two parts do not compete in the same application space.

The RX 7600M wins the only head-to-head category that can be scored, which is the Geekbench OpenCL test. Its score of 63775 places it slightly above the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 by 0.1 percent and marginally below the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP by 0.1 percent. This indicates that the mobile part delivers competitive compute performance for its class, ranking among established workstation and lower-tier desktop cards. The MI350X has no comparable score in the database, so it cannot be assigned a win in any measured test.

The MI350X instead wins on raw specification grounds. It carries 288 GB of HBM3e memory, a 8192-bit bus, and 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s. The MI350X also leads in shading units, texture units, FP32 throughput, and FP16 throughput. For workloads that require massive memory capacity and sustained compute throughput, the MI350X is the clear choice based on the data. For mobile graphics, gaming, and portable rendering tasks, the RX 7600M is the only one of the two that supports display outputs and standard graphics APIs.

The percentile data reinforces this split. The RX 7600M ranks above 89 percent of all GPUs in the database, which is a strong showing for a mobile part. The MI350X sits at the 50th percentile, but that figure is based on no recorded benchmark scores, so it reflects the absence of data rather than poor performance. The database treats the MI350X as an unmeasured compute accelerator, not as a failed competitor.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different AMD architectures and process nodes. The MI350X uses CDNA 4.0, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The RX 7600M uses RDNA 3.0, built on a 6 nm process at the same foundry. The MI350X is part of the Instinct (MIx) generation, while the RX 7600M belongs to the Radeon RX 7000 series under the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish.

The chip designs diverge sharply. The MI350X uses the MI350 256CU chip with 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die, producing a transistor density of 77.7 million per square millimeter. The RX 7600M uses the Navi 33 chip with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding a density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. The MI350X is an OAM module, while the RX 7600M is an IGP with no slot width specification.

Memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The MI350X uses HBM3e with 288 GB capacity and an 8192-bit bus. The RX 7600M uses GDDR6 with 8 GB capacity and a 128-bit bus. The memory clock for both is listed at 2000 MHz, but the effective data rates differ, with the MI350X rated at 8 Gbps effective and the RX 7600M at 16 Gbps effective. The MI350X memory bandwidth reaches 8.19 TB/s versus the RX 7600M's 256.0 GB/s.

Compute resources are heavily lopsided. The MI350X has 16,384 shading units, 1,024 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs. The RX 7600M has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The MI350X has no listed ray tracing cores, while the RX 7600M includes 28. Neither part lists tensor cores. The MI350X also reports a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, while the RX 7600M reaches 154.2 GPixel/s.

The MI350X does not support DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, and it has no display outputs. The RX 7600M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, with display outputs described as portable device dependent. The MI350X uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RX 7600M uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Power delivery also differs, with the MI350X rated at 1000 W TDP and a 1400 W suggested PSU, while the RX 7600M is rated at 90 W TDP with no suggested PSU listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries between these two parts. The only scored test belongs to the RX 7600M, which recorded a Geekbench OpenCL score of 63775. That score places it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63830, the NVIDIA CMP 30HX at 63842, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 at 63693, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 at 64212. The RX 7600M trails the RX 9060 XT LP by 0.1 percent, trails the CMP 30HX by 0.1 percent, leads the Radeon Pro Vega 56 by 0.1 percent, and trails the Radeon Pro WX 9100 by 0.7 percent.

The MI350X has no benchmark scores, no average score, and no nearest rivals in the database. Its percentile of 50 is a placeholder value based on zero measurements. Consequently, no direct numerical comparison can be made between the two parts in any compute workload. The RX 7600M is the only one with empirical data, and it demonstrates competitive performance against established AMD workstation cards.

From a specification perspective, the MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32 and 72.09 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The RX 7600M delivers 17.27 TFLOPS of FP32 and 34.55 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The MI350X is roughly four times higher in FP32 throughput and roughly twice as high in FP16 throughput, based on the recorded specifications. Texture rate follows a similar pattern, with the MI350X at 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus the RX 7600M at 269.9 GTexel/s.

The MI350X also operates at a higher boost clock of 2200 MHz against the RX 7600M's 2410 MHz, but that clock advantage for the mobile part does not offset the massive difference in compute units. The MI350X has 256 compute units in the MI350 256CU chip, while the RX 7600M's Navi 33 chip has far fewer, as reflected in the shading unit count.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X has 16,384 shading units, while the AMD Radeon RX 7600M has 1,792.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two?

A: The MI350X has 288 GB of HBM3e memory, and the RX 7600M has 8 GB of GDDR6.

Q: Does the RX 7600M support modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes, it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI350X supports none of these.

Q: How does the RX 7600M compare to its nearest rivals in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: It scores 63775, which is 0.1 percent below the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX, 0.1 percent above the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56, and 0.7 percent below the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100.

Q: Which part has a higher FP32 throughput?

A: The MI350X reaches 72.09 TFLOPS, while the RX 7600M reaches 17.27 TFLOPS.

Q: Are there any display outputs on the MI350X?

A: No, the MI350X has no display outputs. The RX 7600M has portable device dependent outputs.

Specification Differences

The two AMD parts differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The MI350X uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture on a 3 nm process, while the RX 7600M uses RDNA 3.0 on a 6 nm process. Both come from TSMC. The MI350X chip is the MI350 256CU with 185,000 million transistors and a 2380 mm² die size. The RX 7600M chip is Navi 33 with 13,300 million transistors and a 204 mm² die size. Transistor density is 77.7 million per square millimeter for the MI350X and 65.2 million for the RX 7600M.

Clock speeds differ, with the MI350X at a 1000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the RX 7600M runs at 1500 MHz base, 2070 MHz game clock, and 2410 MHz boost. Memory clock is 2000 MHz for both, but the effective rate is 8 Gbps for the MI350X and 16 Gbps for the RX 7600M.

The MI350X has 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7600M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units are 16,384 versus 1,792. Texture mapping units are 1,024 versus 112. ROPs are 0 versus 64. The RX 7600M has 28 ray tracing cores; the MI350X has none listed.

Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for the MI350X and 154.2 GPixel/s for the RX 7600M. Texture rate is 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus 269.9 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 72.09 TFLOPS versus 17.27 TFLOPS. FP16 performance is 72.09 TFLOPS at 1:1 for the MI350X and 34.55 TFLOPS at 2:1 for the RX 7600M.

The MI350X has a 1000 W TDP and a 1400 W suggested PSU, while the RX 7600M has a 90 W TDP and no suggested PSU. The MI350X is an OAM module with no power connectors, and the RX 7600M is an IGP with no power connectors. Bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 for the MI350X and PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RX 7600M. Display outputs are absent on the MI350X and portable device dependent on the RX 7600M.

API support is entirely absent on the MI350X, while the RX 7600M lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI350X dimensions are 102 mm by 165 mm, while the RX 7600M has no recorded dimensions. Release dates differ, with the MI350X released on 2025-06-11 and the RX 7600M on 2023-01-03. The MI350X predecessor is Radeon Instinct, and the RX 7600M predecessor is Polaris Mobile. Production status for the RX 7600M is active, while the MI350X has no recorded production status.