AMD Instinct MI350X vs NVIDIA H20 NVL16 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Instinct MI350X versus the NVIDIA H20 NVL16. Both entries have empty benchmark arrays, zero wins on each side, and identical percentile rankings at the 50th percentile against all GPUs. The average benchmark score for both accelerators is zero. This means the database has no measured performance comparison to draw upon. What can be analyzed instead is the raw computational capacity encoded in the specification sheets, which reveals a clear division of labor between the two designs. The MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32 and 72.09 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 1:1 ratio, while the H20 NVL16 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32 and 79.07 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. In pure FP32 throughput, the MI350X leads by 32.55 TFLOPS, a substantial margin that indicates nearly double the single-precision capability. In FP16, the H20 NVL16 takes the lead with 6.98 TFLOPS more than the MI350X, though the difference is much narrower. The texture rate also favors the MI350X at 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus 617.8 GTexel/s for the H20 NVL16, a 3.6x advantage. Pixel rate tells a different story: the MI350X reports 0 MPixel/s while the H20 NVL16 manages 47.52 GPixel/s, which suggests the AMD part is not designed for rasterization output at all.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators come from different architectural generations and process technologies. The MI350X uses AMD's CDNA 4.0 architecture on a 3 nm TSMC node, while the H20 NVL16 uses NVIDIA's Hopper architecture on a 5 nm TSMC node. The transistor counts diverge sharply: the MI350X packs 185,000 million transistors across a 2380 mm² die, yielding a density of 77.7 million transistors per square millimeter. The H20 NVL16 contains 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, with a higher density of 98.3 million per square millimeter. Despite having fewer total transistors, the NVIDIA chip achieves denser packing. The MI350X uses a 256-compute-unit chip labeled "MI350 256CU," whereas the H20 NVL16 uses the GH100 chip. Shading unit counts differ as well: the MI350X has 16,384 shading units and 1,024 texture mapping units, while the H20 NVL16 has 9,984 shading units, 312 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The MI350X lists no ROPs and no tensor cores, while the H20 NVL16 includes 312 tensor cores. Clock behavior also separates the two: the MI350X runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the H20 NVL16 runs at 1830 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost. The AMD part has a higher boost clock but a much lower base clock, indicating a wider dynamic range. Memory architecture follows different paths: the MI350X uses 288 GB of HBM3e across an 8192-bit bus, while the H20 NVL16 uses 96 GB of HBM3 across a 6144-bit bus. Memory bandwidth favors the MI350X at 8.19 TB/s versus 4.03 TB/s for the H20 NVL16, a 2x advantage. The memory clocks also differ: 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective on the MI350X versus 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective on the H20 NVL16. Form factors diverge as well: the MI350X comes as an OAM module with no power connectors, and the H20 NVL16 comes as an SXM module. The MI350X lists no display outputs, and the H20 NVL16 also lists no display outputs. Both use a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. The MI350X has no specified production status, while the H20 NVL16 is listed as active with a successor already named as Server Blackwell.

The Verdict

The data indicates two accelerators built for different workloads. The MI350X delivers superior FP32 throughput, higher texture rate, larger memory capacity, wider memory bus, and more than double the memory bandwidth. The H20 NVL16 counters with higher FP16 throughput, a denser transistor layout, a higher base clock, and a much lower power envelope. The MI350X has a TDP of 1000 W and requires a suggested PSU of 1400 W, while the H20 NVL16 has a TDP of 400 W and a suggested PSU of 800 W. The power consumption difference is 600 W, meaning the NVIDIA part operates at 40% of the AMD part's thermal design power. The MI350X has no release date specified in the database, while the H20 NVL16 was released on 2025-09-01. The MI350X lists a predecessor as Radeon Instinct, while the H20 NVL16 lists predecessor Server Ada and successor Server Blackwell. Neither part has a launch MSRP recorded. The MI350X also has no production status, whereas the H20 NVL16 is actively produced. For applications that prioritize FP32 compute and massive memory bandwidth, the MI350X is the clear choice from the recorded specifications. For workloads that rely on FP16 with tensor core acceleration and lower power constraints, the H20 NVL16 presents a more efficient option. The H20 NVL16 also has a defined production lifecycle, while the MI350X's status remains unspecified, which introduces uncertainty for deployment planning.

FAQ

Q: Which accelerator has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32, while the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS. The MI350X leads by 32.55 TFLOPS.

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

A: The MI350X has 288 GB of HBM3e memory, while the H20 NVL16 has 96 GB of HBM3. The AMD part offers 192 GB more memory.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The MI350X has a TDP of 1000 W with a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The H20 NVL16 has a TDP of 400 W with a suggested PSU of 800 W.

Q: Which accelerator has more shading units?

A: The MI350X has 16,384 shading units, while the H20 NVL16 has 9,984 shading units. The AMD part has 6,400 more shading units.

Q: What are the transistor densities of each chip?

A: The MI350X has 77.7 million transistors per square millimeter on a 2380 mm² die. The H20 NVL16 has 98.3 million per square millimeter on an 814 mm² die.

Q: Does either accelerator support display outputs?

A: Both the MI350X and the H20 NVL16 list no display outputs. Neither is designed for direct video output.

Where Each One Wins

The MI350X wins on raw FP32 compute, delivering 72.09 TFLOPS versus 39.54 TFLOPS for the H20 NVL16. It also wins decisively on texture rate, with 2,252.8 GTexel/s compared to 617.8 GTexel/s. Memory capacity favors the MI350X at 288 GB versus 96 GB, and memory bandwidth follows suit at 8.19 TB/s versus 4.03 TB/s. The memory bus width is wider on the MI350X at 8192 bits versus 6144 bits. The MI350X also has more shading units (16,384 versus 9,984) and more TMUs (1,024 versus 312). The boost clock is higher on the MI350X at 2200 MHz versus 1980 MHz. The transistor count is higher as well, at 185,000 million versus 80,000 million. The MI350X uses a more advanced 3 nm process node compared to the 5 nm node of the H20 NVL16.

The H20 NVL16 wins on FP16 throughput, delivering 79.07 TFLOPS versus 72.09 TFLOPS for the MI350X. It also wins on transistor density, with 98.3 million per square millimeter versus 77.7 million. The base clock is higher on the H20 NVL16 at 1830 MHz versus 1000 MHz. The H20 NVL16 has 312 tensor cores, while the MI350X has none listed. Pixel rate favors the H20 NVL16 at 47.52 GPixel/s, while the MI350X reports 0 MPixel/s. The H20 NVL16 has a lower TDP at 400 W versus 1000 W, and a lower suggested PSU at 800 W versus 1400 W. The H20 NVL16 also has a smaller die size at 814 mm² versus 2380 mm². The H20 NVL16 has an active production status, while the MI350X has none specified. The H20 NVL16 has a release date of 2025-09-01, while the MI350X has no release date recorded. The H20 NVL16 also has a defined successor, Server Blackwell, while the MI350X has no successor listed.

Specification Differences

The two accelerators differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The MI350X uses the MI350 256CU chip with CDNA 4.0 architecture, while the H20 NVL16 uses the GH100 chip with Hopper architecture. The process node differs: 3 nm for the MI350X versus 5 nm for the H20 NVL16. Transistor counts are 185,000 million versus 80,000 million. Die size is 2380 mm² versus 814 mm². Transistor density is 77.7 million per square millimeter versus 98.3 million. Base clocks are 1000 MHz versus 1830 MHz. Boost clocks are 2200 MHz versus 1980 MHz. Memory clocks are 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective versus 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective. Memory size is 288 GB versus 96 GB. Memory type is HBM3e versus HBM3. Memory bus width is 8192 bits versus 6144 bits. Memory bandwidth is 8.19 TB/s versus 4.03 TB/s. Shading units are 16,384 versus 9,984. TMUs are 1,024 versus 312. ROPs are 0 versus 24. Tensor cores are none versus 312. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s versus 47.52 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus 617.8 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 72.09 TFLOPS versus 39.54 TFLOPS. FP16 performance is 72.09 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio versus 79.07 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio. TDP is 1000 W versus 400 W. Slot width is OAM Module versus SXM Module. The MI350X has no power connectors listed, while the H20 NVL16 has no power connector data either. Suggested PSU is 1400 W versus 800 W. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16. Both have no display outputs. The MI350X dimensions are 102 mm length and 165 mm width, while the H20 NVL16 has no dimensions recorded. The MI350X has no production status, while the H20 NVL16 is active. The MI350X has no release date, while the H20 NVL16 has a release date of 2025-09-01. The MI350X predecessor is Radeon Instinct, while the H20 NVL16 predecessor is Server Ada. The H20 NVL16 has a successor, Server Blackwell, while the MI350X has none. Neither part has a launch MSRP recorded.