AMD Instinct MI350X vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct benchmark scores for either the AMD Instinct MI350X or the NVIDIA B200 SXM6. The database shows an average benchmark score of 0 for both accelerators, and neither device has any entries in its benchmark history. The head-to-head benchmark comparison field is empty, and the win counts for both devices stand at zero. Consequently, any performance differentiation must be derived from the architectural and specification data recorded in the database rather than from measured workloads.

Both parts occupy the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, which reflects their status as newly released or unbenchmarked devices. The AMD Instinct MI350X lists a release date of June 2025, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 lists October 2024, meaning the NVIDIA part has been available for a longer period yet still shows no recorded benchmark results. The absence of measured data prevents any claim of superiority in real-world tasks, and the analysis below relies entirely on the recorded specifications.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators diverge fundamentally at the architecture level. The AMD Instinct MI350X uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture with the MI350 256CU chip, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses the Blackwell architecture with the GB100 chip. The AMD part belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation, whereas the NVIDIA part belongs to the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation.

Manufacturing processes differ substantially. AMD fabricated the MI350X on a 3 nm process at TSMC, while NVIDIA fabricated the B200 SXM6 on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The AMD chip contains 185,000 million transistors on a die size of 2380 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 77.7 million transistors per mm². The NVIDIA chip contains 208,000 million transistors on a smaller die of 1628 mm², yielding a higher transistor density of 127.8 million transistors per mm². The data shows the NVIDIA part packs more transistors into a smaller physical area despite using a larger process node.

Clock behavior differs significantly. The AMD Instinct MI350X runs at a base clock of 1000 MHz and boosts to 2200 MHz. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 runs at a very low base clock of 120 MHz but boosts to 1830 MHz. This unusual base clock for the NVIDIA part suggests a design that relies heavily on boost behavior rather than sustained base operation. Memory clocks are identical: both run at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective data rate.

Memory capacity separates the two clearly. The AMD MI350X carries 288 GB of HBM3e memory, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 carries 180 GB of HBM3e memory. Both use an 8192-bit memory bus and achieve identical bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s. The AMD part therefore offers 108 GB more capacity at the same bandwidth, which matters for workloads that exceed the NVIDIA memory footprint.

Compute resources differ in composition. The AMD MI350X has 16,384 shading units, 1,024 texture mapping units, and no raster operation pipelines, resulting in a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, 592 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operation pipelines, resulting in a pixel rate of 43.92 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA part also records 592 tensor cores, while the AMD part lists no tensor core count. Texture throughput favors AMD: the MI350X delivers 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus 1,083.4 GTexel/s for the B200 SXM6.

Floating-point performance is close. The AMD MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 with a 1:1 ratio. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, also at 1:1 ratio. The AMD part holds a 2.75 TFLOPS lead in both precisions, a margin of roughly 4 percent. Neither device exposes DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan APIs, confirming their compute-only orientation.

Power and physical design show both similarities and differences. Both parts draw 1000 W and list a suggested power supply of 1400 W. The AMD MI350X mounts as an OAM Module, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 mounts as an SXM Module. The AMD part measures 102 mm in length and 165 mm in width, while the NVIDIA part has no recorded dimensions. The AMD part lists no power connectors, and the NVIDIA part has no power connector data. Bus interfaces differ: the AMD uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the NVIDIA uses PCIe 6.0 x16. Neither part has display outputs.

Production status differs. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is listed as Active, while the AMD MI350X has no production status recorded. The NVIDIA part has both a predecessor (Server Hopper) and a successor (Server Rubin) in the database, while the AMD part lists only a predecessor (Radeon Instinct) and no successor. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has a launch MSRP of 34,999 USD, while the AMD MI350X has no launch MSRP recorded.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the AMD Instinct MI350X and NVIDIA B200 SXM6 target different strengths. The AMD part leads in raw compute throughput, delivering 72.09 TFLOPS in FP32 and FP16 versus 69.34 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA part. It also provides 288 GB of HBM3e memory, which is 108 GB more than the NVIDIA part, at identical 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. Texture throughput strongly favors AMD at 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus 1,083.4 GTexel/s.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 counters with a higher shading unit count of 18,944 versus 16,384, and it includes 592 tensor cores where the AMD part lists none. The NVIDIA part has raster operation pipelines and a nonzero pixel rate of 43.92 GPixel/s, while the AMD part has zero ROPs and zero pixel throughput. The NVIDIA part also uses the newer PCIe 6.0 x16 bus interface, while the AMD part uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Transistor density favors NVIDIA at 127.8 million transistors per mm² versus 77.7 million for AMD.

For memory-bound workloads that require the largest possible model footprint, the AMD MI350X offers the clear advantage with 288 GB of capacity. For workloads that depend on tensor core acceleration or pixel processing, the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has the relevant hardware. The absence of benchmark scores in the database means neither part can be declared a winner in measured performance; the verdict rests on specification-level advantages.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Instinct MI350X | NVIDIA B200 SXM6 |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 4.0 | Blackwell |

| Process node | 3 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 185,000 million | 208,000 million |

| Die size | 2380 mm² | 1628 mm² |

| Transistor density | 77.7M / mm² | 127.8M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1000 MHz | 120 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2200 MHz | 1830 MHz |

| Memory size | 288 GB | 180 GB |

| Shading units | 16,384 | 18,944 |

| Texture mapping units | 1,024 | 592 |

| Raster operation pipelines | 0 | 24 |

| Tensor cores | None listed | 592 |

| Pixel rate | 0 MPixel/s | 43.92 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 2,252.8 GTexel/s | 1,083.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 72.09 TFLOPS | 69.34 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 72.09 TFLOPS | 69.34 TFLOPS |

| Slot width | OAM Module | SXM Module |

| Bus interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 6.0 x16 |

| Release date | June 2025 | October 2024 |

| Production status | Not recorded | Active |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | Server Hopper |

| Successor | None recorded | Server Rubin |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | 34,999 USD |

FAQ

Q: Which accelerator has more memory capacity?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X has 288 GB of HBM3e memory, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has 180 GB. Both use the same memory type, bus width of 8192 bits, and bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s.

Q: How do the two compare in FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS in FP32, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS. The AMD part holds a lead of approximately 4 percent in this metric.

Q: Does either part have tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 lists 592 tensor cores. The AMD Instinct MI350X has no tensor core count recorded in the database.

Q: What are the transistor counts and die sizes?

A: The AMD MI350X contains 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 contains 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die.

Q: What power supply is suggested for each part?

A: Both the AMD MI350X and the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 list a suggested power supply of 1400 W, and both have a TDP of 1000 W.

Q: Which part uses the newer PCIe interface?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses PCIe 6.0 x16, while the AMD Instinct MI350X uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350X wins in compute throughput. Its FP32 and FP16 figures of 72.09 TFLOPS exceed the NVIDIA part by 2.75 TFLOPS. The AMD part also wins on memory capacity with 288 GB versus 180 GB, and it delivers more than double the texture rate at 2,252.8 GTexel/s. The AMD part uses a smaller 3 nm process node, which may offer efficiency advantages, and its boost clock of 2200 MHz is higher than the NVIDIA part's 1830 MHz. The AMD part also has a larger die at 2380 mm².

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 wins on transistor count with 208,000 million versus 185,000 million, and it achieves a much higher transistor density of 127.8M per mm². The NVIDIA part has more shading units at 18,944 versus 16,384, and it is the only one of the two with tensor cores, listing 592 of them. The NVIDIA part has 24 ROPs and a pixel rate of 43.92 GPixel/s, while the AMD part has zero ROPs and zero pixel throughput. The NVIDIA part uses PCIe 6.0 x16, which is a newer bus interface than the AMD part's PCIe 5.0 x16. The NVIDIA part also has an active production status and a successor in the database, indicating an ongoing product lifecycle.

For workloads that fit within 180 GB of memory and require tensor core operations, the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 holds the specification advantage. For workloads that need the largest memory footprint or maximum FP32 and FP16 throughput, the AMD Instinct MI350X leads. The database records no measured benchmark results for either part, so these conclusions derive entirely from the recorded specification data.