AMD Instinct MI350X vs AMD Radeon RX 7600S Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Instinct MI350X and the AMD Radeon RX 7600S. The Instinct MI350X currently holds zero recorded benchmark scores across all test suites, while the RX 7600S has ten documented results. The absence of overlapping measurements means a direct performance comparison cannot be established from the recorded data. The MI350X sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the RX 7600S ranks at the 60th percentile, indicating that the mobile part occupies a higher relative position in the overall distribution despite its far smaller silicon.

The RX 7600S delivers its strongest result in Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 73,868, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 68,012. Its Passmark G3D result reaches 15,408, while Passmark GPU Compute lands at 6,520. In legacy DirectX tests, the card posts 211 in Passmark DirectX 9, 140 in DirectX 11, 74 in DirectX 10, and 65 in DirectX 12. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1,888, and the Passmark G2D result is 776. The average benchmark score across all ten tests is 16,696.

Nearest rival comparisons for the RX 7600S show a tightly clustered field. The NVIDIA T400 4 GB averages 16,792, which places it 0.6% ahead of the RX 7600S. The NVIDIA T400 averages 16,508, putting it 1.1% behind. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 averages 16,504, also 1.1% behind. The NVIDIA Tesla M4 averages 16,932, which is 1.4% ahead. These delta percentages indicate that the RX 7600S performs within a narrow band around these competing products, with no single rival holding a decisive margin.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7600S wins in every category where measurement data exists, simply because the MI350X has no recorded benchmarks. For the mobile GPU, the strongest domain is compute-oriented workloads: the Geekbench Vulkan score of 73,868 and OpenCL score of 68,012 both exceed the Passmark GPU Compute result of 6,520 by a wide margin, suggesting the architecture handles API-level compute tasks more efficiently than the Passmark compute workload. The DirectX 12 result of 65 sits notably lower than the DirectX 11 result of 140, which may reflect driver optimization patterns or workload characteristics rather than raw capability.

The MI350X, by contrast, presents a theoretical profile that cannot be validated through benchmark data. Its FP32 throughput is listed at 72.09 TFLOPS, while the RX 7600S delivers 15.77 TFLOPS. FP16 performance on the MI350X is identical at 72.09 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the RX 7600S reaches 31.54 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. Texture rate on the MI350X is 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus 246.4 GTexel/s on the RX 7600S. Pixel rate, however, is 0 MPixel/s on the MI350X, while the RX 7600S manages 140.8 GPixel/s. These figures indicate that the MI350X is built for compute throughput without rasterization output, while the RX 7600S includes full display and pixel processing capabilities.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The MI350X carries 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7600S has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI350X's memory bandwidth is roughly 32 times higher, though the RX 7600S memory speed is 16 Gbps effective versus 8 Gbps effective on the MI350X. The MI350X also uses a 3 nm process with 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die, while the RX 7600S uses a 6 nm process with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die.

The Verdict

The data does not support a performance verdict between these two products because the MI350X has zero benchmark entries. What the database does show is that the RX 7600S occupies the 60th percentile among all GPUs with an average score of 16,696, and its nearest rivals are all within 1.4% of that figure. The MI350X sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of 0, which reflects the absence of recorded results rather than actual performance.

From a hardware specification standpoint, the MI350X is a compute accelerator with no display outputs, no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API support, and a 1000 W TDP. The RX 7600S is a mobile integrated GPU with DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, a 75 W TDP, and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The MI350X uses an OAM module slot, while the RX 7600S is listed as IGP. The MI350X requires a 1400 W suggested PSU; the RX 7600S has no suggested PSU entry.

For workloads that demand massive FP32 or FP16 compute, the MI350X specification sheet indicates a capability level far beyond the RX 7600S: 16384 shading units versus 1792, 1024 TMUs versus 112, and 288 GB of HBM3e versus 8 GB of GDDR6. However, the MI350X has 0 ROPs and a 0 MPixel/s pixel rate, meaning it cannot produce rendered frames for display. The RX 7600S has 64 ROPs and 28 ray tracing cores. Users requiring rasterization, ray tracing, or standard graphics APIs should select the RX 7600S. Users requiring pure compute throughput with no display output should consider the MI350X only if its unmeasured performance aligns with their workload requirements.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600S has an average benchmark score of 16,696 across ten tests. The AMD Instinct MI350X has an average score of 0, as it has no recorded benchmark results.

Q: How does the RX 7600S compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The NVIDIA T400 4 GB is 0.6% ahead, the NVIDIA T400 is 1.1% behind, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 is 1.2% behind, and the NVIDIA Tesla M4 is 1.4% ahead. All four rivals fall within a 2.6% total spread.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: The MI350X has 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth and 2000 MHz memory clock (8 Gbps effective). The RX 7600S has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth and 2000 MHz memory clock (16 Gbps effective).

Q: Does the MI350X support graphics APIs?

A: No. The MI350X lists DirectX as N/A, OpenGL as N/A, and Vulkan as N/A. It also has no display outputs. The RX 7600S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the FP32 compute throughput for each GPU?

A: The MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS FP32 with a 1:1 FP16 ratio. The RX 7600S delivers 15.77 TFLOPS FP32 with a 2:1 FP16 ratio, yielding 31.54 TFLOPS FP16.

Q: What process nodes and die sizes do these GPUs use?

A: The MI350X uses a 3 nm process at TSMC with 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die. The RX 7600S uses a 6 nm process at TSMC with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die.

Architecture Differences

The MI350X is built on CDNA 4.0 architecture under the Instinct (MIx) generation, while the RX 7600S uses RDNA 3.0 architecture under the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation. The CDNA lineage targets data center compute, while RDNA targets graphics rendering and gaming workloads. The MI350X chip is designated MI350 256CU, and the RX 7600S chip is Navi 33 with the codename Hotpink Bonefish.

The process technology differs significantly: the MI350X uses a 3 nm node, while the RX 7600S uses a 6 nm node, both fabricated by TSMC. Transistor counts reflect the scale gap, with the MI350X at 185,000 million transistors and the RX 7600S at 13,300 million. Die size is 2380 mm² for the MI350X versus 204 mm² for the RX 7600S, giving transistor densities of 77.7M per mm² and 65.2M per mm² respectively.

Compute unit organization differs by architecture. The MI350X has 16,384 shading units, 1,024 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. The RX 7600S has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The MI350X has no ray tracing core entry. Pixel rate on the MI350X is 0 MPixel/s, while the RX 7600S reaches 140.8 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 2,252.8 GTexel/s for the MI350X and 246.4 GTexel/s for the RX 7600S.

Clock behavior also differs. The MI350X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost of 2200 MHz. The RX 7600S has a base of 1500 MHz, a boost of 2200 MHz, and a game clock of 1865 MHz. Memory clocks are both listed at 2000 MHz, but the effective rates differ: 8 Gbps for the MI350X's HBM3e and 16 Gbps for the RX 7600S's GDDR6.

Power and physical specifications diverge completely. The MI350X has a 1000 W TDP, an OAM Module slot width, no power connectors, and a 1400 W suggested PSU. Its dimensions are 102 mm length and 165 mm width. The RX 7600S has a 75 W TDP, an IGP slot width, no power connectors, no suggested PSU, and no recorded dimensions. The MI350X uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the RX 7600S uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

The MI350X was released on June 11, 2025, and its predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct. The RX 7600S was released on January 3, 2023, and its predecessor is Polaris Mobile. The RX 7600S production status is Active, while the MI350X has no production status entry. Neither product has a successor listed, and neither has a launch MSRP in the database.