AMD Instinct MI350X vs AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Instinct MI350X and the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT target entirely different segments, and the recorded data confirms a decisive performance gap. The MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 72.09 TFLOPS of FP16 (1:1 ratio), while the RX 7600M XT delivers 20.23 TFLOPS FP32 and 40.45 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). This means the MI350X offers roughly 3.6 times the single-precision throughput and 1.8 times the half-precision throughput on paper. The texture rate differential is even more stark: the MI350X reaches 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus 316.0 GTexel/s for the RX 7600M XT, a 7.1 times advantage.

Memory bandwidth is another major separator. The MI350X uses 288 GB of HBM3e across an 8192-bit bus, yielding 8.19 TB/s. The RX 7600M XT uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s. The MI350X has 28.4 times the bandwidth of the RX 7600M XT. The MI350X also reports a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s because it has no ROPs, while the RX 7600M XT delivers 158.0 GPixel/s from its 64 ROPs. This makes the MI350X unsuitable for traditional rasterization workloads, which explains its lack of display outputs. The RX 7600M XT, by contrast, is a mobile graphics processor with portable device dependent outputs.

The MI350X has 16,384 shading units and 1,024 TMUs, compared to 2,048 shading units and 128 TMUs on the RX 7600M XT. That is an 8 times difference in both shading units and texture mapping units. The MI350X also integrates 32 ray tracing cores on the RX 7600M XT, a feature entirely absent from the MI350X's specification sheet. The MI350X is built on a 3 nm TSMC process with 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die, while the RX 7600M XT uses a 6 nm TSMC process with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. The MI350X has a transistor density of 77.7M per mm² versus 65.2M per mm² for the RX 7600M XT.

The benchmark database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two products, and the MI350X has no recorded benchmark scores, an average score of 0, and a percentile rank of 50 among all GPUs. The RX 7600M XT has a recorded average benchmark score of 12,710, with a percentile rank of 52. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 at 12,773 (0.5% higher), the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm at 12,625 (0.7% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 at 12,830 (0.9% higher), and the AMD Radeon Pro 455 at 12,831 (0.9% higher). The RX 7600M XT thus sits within 1% of these older desktop and workstation parts, indicating its performance class in the database is comparable to high-end GPUs from roughly a decade earlier.

The RX 7600M XT's individual benchmark results show a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,048, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 74,869, and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 27,793. Its PassMark results are 76 in DirectX 10, 137 in DirectX 11, 58 in DirectX 12, 175 in DirectX 9, 894 in G2D, 13,907 in G3D, and 7,140 in GPU Compute. These scores place the RX 7600M XT in the lower half of the database's percentile distribution despite its 52nd percentile rank, a result of the database including many professional and enterprise accelerators with much higher scores.

FAQ

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference between the two cards?

A: The MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the RX 7600M XT delivers 20.23 TFLOPS, making the MI350X approximately 3.6 times faster in single-precision compute.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The MI350X has 288 GB of HBM3e memory with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth over an 8192-bit bus. The RX 7600M XT has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth over a 128-bit bus.

Q: Does the MI350X support ray tracing?

A: No. The MI350X specification lists no ray tracing cores. The RX 7600M XT includes 32 ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the manufacturing process nodes?

A: The MI350X uses a 3 nm TSMC process, while the RX 7600M XT uses a 6 nm TSMC process.

Q: What is the RX 7600M XT's average benchmark score?

A: The RX 7600M XT has an average benchmark score of 12,710, with a percentile rank of 52 among all GPUs in the database.

Q: Why does the MI350X have a 0 MPixel/s pixel rate?

A: The MI350X has 0 ROPs, so it cannot perform traditional pixel rendering. The RX 7600M XT has 64 ROPs and a pixel rate of 158.0 GPixel/s.

Architecture Differences

The MI350X uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture, a compute-focused design from AMD's Instinct (MIx) generation. The RX 7600M XT uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture, part of the Radeon RX 7000 series and Navi Mobile generation, with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish." These architectures target fundamentally different workloads: CDNA 4.0 prioritizes massively parallel compute throughput for accelerators, while RDNA 3.0 is a graphics-oriented architecture with fixed-function rendering hardware.

The MI350X is built on a 3 nm TSMC process and packs 185,000 million transistors into a 2380 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 77.7M per mm². The RX 7600M XT uses a 6 nm TSMC process with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding a density of 65.2M per mm². The MI350X has 16,384 shading units and 1,024 TMUs, while the RX 7600M XT has 2,048 shading units and 128 TMUs. The MI350X has no ROPs and no ray tracing cores; the RX 7600M XT has 64 ROPs and 32 ray tracing cores.

Memory architecture differs completely. The MI350X uses 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7600M XT uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI350X supports a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, meaning it processes half-precision at the same rate as single-precision. The RX 7600M XT uses a 2:1 ratio, processing FP16 at twice the FP32 rate. The MI350X reports 72.09 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, while the RX 7600M XT reports 20.23 TFLOPS FP32 and 40.45 TFLOPS FP16.

The MI350X has no display outputs and no supported graphics APIs, listing DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A. The RX 7600M XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and its display outputs are portable device dependent. The MI350X uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the RX 7600M XT uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The MI350X is an OAM Module with no power connectors and a 1000 W TDP, suggesting a 1400 W power supply. The RX 7600M XT is an IGP with no power connectors and a 120 W TDP.

Specification Differences

The two products differ across nearly every specification field. The MI350X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz, with a memory clock of 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The RX 7600M XT has a base clock of 1280 MHz, a boost clock of 2469 MHz, a game clock of 2023 MHz, and a memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The MI350X's memory size is 288 GB of HBM3e; the RX 7600M XT has 8 GB of GDDR6. Memory bus width is 8192 bits versus 128 bits, and bandwidth is 8.19 TB/s versus 288.0 GB/s.

Shading units number 16,384 on the MI350X versus 2,048 on the RX 7600M XT. TMUs are 1,024 versus 128. ROPs are 0 versus 64. Ray tracing cores are absent on the MI350X and present as 32 on the RX 7600M XT. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s versus 158.0 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus 316.0 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 72.09 TFLOPS versus 20.23 TFLOPS. FP16 compute is 72.09 TFLOPS versus 40.45 TFLOPS. TDP is 1000 W versus 120 W.

The MI350X is an OAM Module, while the RX 7600M XT is an IGP. The MI350X has no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 1400 W; the RX 7600M XT has no power connectors and no suggested PSU listed. Bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are none versus portable device dependent. Supported APIs are all N/A on the MI350X, while the RX 7600M XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI350X measures 102 mm by 165 mm; the RX 7600M XT has no recorded dimensions. The MI350X was released on 2025-06-11, and the RX 7600M XT on 2023-01-03. The MI350X's predecessor is Radeon Instinct; the RX 7600M XT's predecessor is Polaris Mobile. Production status is listed as null for the MI350X and Active for the RX 7600M XT.

Where Each One Wins

The MI350X wins decisively in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 performance of 72.09 TFLOPS is 3.6 times the RX 7600M XT's 20.23 TFLOPS. Its FP16 performance of 72.09 TFLOPS is 1.8 times the RX 7600M XT's 40.45 TFLOPS. Texture rate is 7.1 times higher, and memory bandwidth is 28.4 times higher. The MI350X also has 8 times more shading units and 8 times more TMUs, making it the clear choice for compute-intensive workloads such as large-scale data processing, scientific simulation, and AI inference where FP16 with 1:1 ratio matters.

The RX 7600M XT wins in graphics rendering and client-side workloads. It has 64 ROPs and a pixel rate of 158.0 GPixel/s, while the MI350X has zero ROPs and zero pixel rate. The RX 7600M XT includes 32 ray tracing cores, which the MI350X lacks entirely. The RX 7600M XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI350X supports no graphics APIs. The RX 7600M XT also has display outputs, albeit portable device dependent, while the MI350X has none. Its lower TDP of 120 W versus 1000 W makes it feasible for mobile and portable form factors.

The RX 7600M XT is the only one of the two with recorded benchmark data. Its average score of 12,710 places it near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12,773, 0.5% higher), the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm (12,625, 0.7% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12,830, 0.9% higher), and the AMD Radeon Pro 455 (12,831, 0.9% higher). The MI350X has no benchmark scores in the database, so its percentile rank of 50 is based on its specification profile rather than measured performance.

The Verdict

The data indicates a binary choice based on workload class. The AMD Instinct MI350X is a 1000 W OAM accelerator with 288 GB of HBM3e, 16,384 shading units, 72.09 TFLOPS FP32, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. It has no ROPs, no display outputs, and no graphics API support. This product is designed for accelerator deployments where massive memory capacity, extreme bandwidth, and raw compute density are the primary requirements. Its 3 nm process, 2380 mm² die, and 185,000 million transistors confirm a top-tier enterprise compute part.

The AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT is a 120 W mobile IGP with 8 GB of GDDR6, 64 ROPs, 32 ray tracing cores, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. Its 20.23 TFLOPS FP32 and 40.45 TFLOPS FP16 are modest next to the MI350X, but it delivers 158.0 GPixel/s pixel rate and portable device dependent display outputs. Its average benchmark score of 12,710 and 52nd percentile rank place it within 1% of several older high-end GPUs, indicating it performs at a level suitable for graphics and lighter compute tasks in mobile systems.

The MI350X should be selected for data center and scientific compute roles where the absence of rendering hardware is irrelevant and the 8.19 TB/s bandwidth and 288 GB memory capacity are decisive. The RX 7600M XT should be selected for graphics rendering, ray tracing, and portable device use cases where the 32 ray tracing cores, 64 ROPs, and API support matter. No single product satisfies both profiles based on the recorded specifications, and the lack of head-to-head benchmark data reinforces that these are not competing in the same market segment.