AMD Instinct MI350X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains benchmark results for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER, while the AMD Instinct MI350X has no benchmark entries in the database. This makes a direct numerical comparison impossible for most standard graphics workloads. Instead, the analysis must rely on the specification sheets, which reveal two profoundly different devices.

The RTX 4080 SUPER delivers an average benchmark score of 54,209 across its recorded tests. Its strongest result comes from Geekbench Vulkan at 260,075, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 219,065. In PassMark tests, the G3D score reaches 34,245, while GPU compute hits 19,822. The RTX 4080 SUPER sits at the 86th percentile among all GPUs in the database, placing it well within the high-performance segment for consumer graphics.

The MI350X carries no benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile by default. Its average benchmark score is recorded as zero. This absence of data does not indicate poor performance; rather, it reflects the accelerator's positioning outside typical consumer benchmarking suites. The MI350X targets compute and AI workloads, not rasterization or ray tracing, so standard graphics tests do not apply.

When examining the RTX 4080 SUPER against its nearest rivals, the data shows a tight grouping. The RTX 4080 (non-SUPER) scores 54,247, putting the SUPER version 0.1% behind. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54,828, which is 1.1% ahead of the RTX 4080 SUPER. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55,698, landing 2.7% ahead, and the AMD Radeon 8060S scores 55,757, 2.8% ahead. These deltas are small, indicating that the RTX 4080 SUPER competes within a narrow performance band relative to these specific cards in the database.

The absence of head-to-head benchmark entries between the MI350X and RTX 4080 SUPER means the database records zero wins for either side. The performance comparison must therefore be inferred from architectural and specification differences rather than measured results.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI350X have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The MI350X has an empty benchmark array, an average benchmark score of zero, and zero wins in head-to-head comparisons. The RTX 4080 SUPER, by contrast, has ten recorded benchmark scores across 3DMark, Geekbench, and PassMark tests.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the RTX 4080 SUPER delivers 52.22 TFLOPS. The MI350X is approximately 38% higher in raw FP32 throughput based on these recorded figures.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The MI350X includes 288 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus, yielding 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4080 SUPER includes 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, yielding 736.3 GB/s. The MI350X has 18 times the memory capacity and over 11 times the bandwidth.

Q: Does the RTX 4080 SUPER support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The RTX 4080 SUPER includes 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI350X lists no RT or tensor core counts and has N/A for all API support.

Q: Which card is smaller in physical size?

A: The MI350X measures 102 mm in length and 165 mm in width, using an OAM module form factor. The RTX 4080 SUPER measures 310 mm in length, 140 mm in height, and 61 mm in width, using a triple-slot design. The MI350X is drastically shorter but wider.

Q: What is the release timeline for these two products?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER was released on 2024-01-30 and is marked as end-of-life. The MI350X was released on 2025-06-11, about 16 months later, and has no production status recorded.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The MI350X uses AMD's CDNA 4.0 architecture, built specifically for compute accelerators. The RTX 4080 SUPER uses NVIDIA's Ada Lovelace architecture, designed for consumer graphics and gaming.

The manufacturing processes differ significantly. The MI350X uses a 3 nm process at TSMC, while the RTX 4080 SUPER uses a 5 nm process at the same foundry. The smaller node allows the MI350X to pack 185,000 million transistors onto a 2380 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 77.7 million per square millimeter. The RTX 4080 SUPER contains 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, with a density of 121.1 million per square millimeter. Interestingly, the RTX 4080 SUPER has a higher transistor density despite the larger process node, while the MI350X has a massive die that accommodates far more total transistors.

The MI350X uses a compute-oriented memory subsystem with HBM3e across an 8192-bit bus. The RTX 4080 SUPER uses GDDR6X across a 256-bit bus, which is typical for consumer graphics cards. The MI350X has no display outputs, no pixel rate, and no ROPs. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 112 ROPs and a pixel rate of 285.6 GPixel/s. The MI350X also has no recorded API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, while the RTX 4080 SUPER supports all three with modern versions.

Clock speeds reveal different design targets. The MI350X runs a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The RTX 4080 SUPER runs a base clock of 2295 MHz and a boost clock of 2550 MHz. The RTX 4080 SUPER operates at higher frequencies, but the MI350X compensates with far more compute units: 16384 shading units and 1024 TMUs versus 10240 shading units and 320 TMUs on the RTX 4080 SUPER.

The MI350X has a texture rate of 2,252.8 GTexel/s, more than 2.7 times the 816.0 GTexel/s of the RTX 4080 SUPER. The MI350X also delivers FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio to FP32, both at 72.09 TFLOPS. The RTX 4080 SUPER also provides a 1:1 FP16 ratio, but at 52.22 TFLOPS.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show clear divergence across nearly every field. The MI350X uses a 3 nm process; the RTX 4080 SUPER uses 5 nm. The MI350X has 185,000 million transistors; the RTX 4080 SUPER has 45,900 million. The die size is 2380 mm² versus 379 mm². Transistor density is 77.7 million per mm² versus 121.1 million per mm².

Memory differs completely: 288 GB of HBM3e versus 16 GB of GDDR6X. The bus width is 8192 bit versus 256 bit. Bandwidth is 8.19 TB/s versus 736.3 GB/s. The MI350X has 16384 shading units, 1024 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. The MI350X lists no RT cores or tensor cores; the RTX 4080 SUPER lists 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores.

Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for the MI350X and 285.6 GPixel/s for the RTX 4080 SUPER. Texture rate is 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus 816.0 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 are both 72.09 TFLOPS for the MI350X and 52.22 TFLOPS for the RTX 4080 SUPER.

Power draw differs substantially: 1000 W TDP for the MI350X versus 320 W for the RTX 4080 SUPER. The MI350X uses an OAM module with no power connectors, while the RTX 4080 SUPER is a triple-slot card with a 1x 16-pin connector. The suggested PSU is 1400 W for the MI350X and 700 W for the RTX 4080 SUPER. The MI350X uses PCIe 5.0 x16; the RTX 4080 SUPER uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

The MI350X has no display outputs; the RTX 4080 SUPER has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The MI350X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan; the RTX 4080 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Dimensions are 102 mm by 165 mm for the MI350X versus 310 mm by 140 mm by 61 mm for the RTX 4080 SUPER. The MI350X was released on 2025-06-11; the RTX 4080 SUPER on 2024-01-30. The RTX 4080 SUPER has a launch MSRP of 999 USD.

The Verdict

The data describes two products with almost no overlap in purpose. The MI350X is a compute accelerator with massive memory capacity, enormous FP32 throughput, and no graphics output. The RTX 4080 SUPER is a consumer graphics card with display outputs, ray tracing support, and a full API stack. Benchmark results exist only for the RTX 4080 SUPER, which sits at the 86th percentile among all GPUs. The MI350X has no recorded benchmarks and sits at the 50th percentile by default.

For standard graphics workloads, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the only option with any supporting data. Its average benchmark score of 54,209 and its near-tie with the RTX 4080 (within 0.1%) indicate strong, consistent performance in consumer tests. The MI350X cannot run these tests because it has no display outputs and no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan.

For compute workloads, the MI350X shows decisive specification advantages: 288 GB of memory versus 16 GB, 8.19 TB/s bandwidth versus 736.3 GB/s, and 72.09 TFLOPS FP32 versus 52.22 TFLOPS. These are raw capability figures, not measured results, but they point to a clear purpose-built design for large-scale computation.

The RTX 4080 SUPER is end-of-life, while the MI350X has no production status recorded. The RTX 4080 SUPER has a successor in the GeForce 50 series; the MI350X lists no successor.

Where Each One Wins

The MI350X wins decisively in memory capacity, memory bandwidth, FP32 compute, FP16 compute, texture rate, transistor count, die size, and process node. It also uses a newer PCIe interface (5.0 versus 4.0). These advantages point to workloads involving large models, massive datasets, or high-throughput matrix operations. The 288 GB HBM3e pool and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth are the standout figures, enabling data residency that the 16 GB RTX 4080 SUPER cannot approach.

The RTX 4080 SUPER wins in every graphics-oriented category: pixel rate, ROP count, RT cores, tensor cores, API support, display outputs, and clock speeds. It has a higher boost clock (2550 MHz versus 2200 MHz) and a higher base clock (2295 MHz versus 1000 MHz). It also has a much lower power draw (320 W versus 1000 W) and a lower suggested PSU (700 W versus 1400 W). The RTX 4080 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, all of which are N/A for the MI350X. It has a physical form factor that fits standard PC cases, while the MI350X uses an OAM module designed for server racks.

The transistor density also favors the RTX 4080 SUPER at 121.1 million per mm² versus 77.7 million per mm², indicating a more compact logic design despite the larger process node. The RTX 4080 SUPER is the only one of the two with any recorded benchmark scores, and its percentile ranking of 86 confirms solid placement among all GPUs in the database.

In summary, the MI350X is built for raw compute density and massive memory, while the RTX 4080 SUPER is built for interactive graphics and broad software compatibility. The recorded data supports each card winning in its respective domain, with no overlap in measured benchmarks.