AMD Instinct MI350X vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Instinct MI350X versus the NVIDIA N1 20SM. Both products show an average benchmark score of 0, and neither has any benchmark results listed in their respective entries. The wins counter for each product stands at 0, meaning the database has not yet recorded a single comparative test between these two accelerators.

This absence of data is itself informative. The AMD Instinct MI350X sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, a mid-pack placement that reflects the lack of measured performance entries rather than actual capability. The NVIDIA N1 20SM also holds the 50th percentile, with the same caveat. Without recorded scores, any quantitative comparison of compute throughput, memory bandwidth, or rendering performance must rely entirely on the specification sheets rather than observed results.

The FP32 compute figures from the specifications do provide a basis for expected performance differences. The AMD Instinct MI350X lists 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM lists 12.01 TFLOPS. That represents a 6.0x difference in raw single-precision compute, assuming both parts sustain their rated figures. FP16 performance mirrors this exactly, with both products showing a 1:1 ratio between FP16 and FP32, so the same multiplier applies for half-precision workloads.

Texture rate tells a similar story. The AMD part delivers 2,252.8 GTexel/s, while the NVIDIA part delivers 375.4 GTexel/s. The AMD accelerator is 6.0x faster on texture fill, which aligns with the shading unit count disparity: 16,384 shading units versus 2,560. Pixel rate, however, flips the expectation. The AMD Instinct MI350X shows 0 MPixel/s, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM shows 56.30 GPixel/s. This reflects a fundamental design difference: the AMD product has zero ROPs, making it unsuitable for traditional rasterization output, while the NVIDIA part includes 24 ROPs.

Memory bandwidth separates the two by an even larger margin. The AMD Instinct MI350X lists 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth from 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus. The NVIDIA N1 20SM lists 273.2 GB/s from 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus. The AMD part offers 30.0x the memory bandwidth and 2.25x the capacity. Clock speeds differ in the opposite direction: the NVIDIA part boosts to 2346 MHz versus 2200 MHz for the AMD part, and its base clock of 741 MHz sits below the AMD base of 1000 MHz. Memory clock rates are close, with the AMD memory at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) and the NVIDIA memory at 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective).

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The AMD Instinct MI350X uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture, built on the MI350 256CU chip. The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, built on the GB20B chip. Both are manufactured by TSMC, but at different process nodes: the AMD part uses a 3 nm process, while the NVIDIA part uses a 5 nm process. The AMD die measures 2380 mm² with 185,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 77.7M per mm². The NVIDIA die measures 382 mm², which is 6.2x smaller, though its transistor count is listed as unknown in the database.

The AMD part integrates 16,384 shading units, 1,024 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs. It has no listed ray tracing cores or tensor cores in the specification fields, though the CDNA architecture is compute-oriented rather than graphics-oriented. The NVIDIA part integrates 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 20 ray tracing cores, and 80 tensor cores. The inclusion of RT and tensor cores indicates that the N1 20SM carries hardware for ray traversal and matrix math, while the MI350X specification does not record such units.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The AMD part uses HBM3e with an 8192-bit bus, which explains the 8.19 TB/s bandwidth figure. The NVIDIA part uses LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus, limiting bandwidth to 273.2 GB/s. The AMD memory clock is 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective), while the NVIDIA memory clock is 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective). The effective data rate is slightly higher on the NVIDIA part, but the bus width difference overwhelms that advantage.

Form factor and power delivery differ as well. The AMD Instinct MI350X is an OAM Module with no power connectors, requiring a 1400 W suggested PSU and carrying a 1000 W TDP. The NVIDIA N1 20SM is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors and an unknown TDP. Both use a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. The AMD part has no display outputs, while the NVIDIA part includes 1x HDMI output. The AMD dimensions are recorded as 102 mm length (4 inches) and 165 mm width (6.5 inches), while the NVIDIA dimensions are not listed.

The AMD part has no direct predecessor or successor listed in the database, though its generation field indicates it belongs to the Instinct (MIx) series and its predecessor field references Radeon Instinct. The NVIDIA part belongs to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation, has an active production status, and lists no predecessor or successor. The AMD release date is 2025-06-11, while the NVIDIA release date is 2026-05-31, placing the AMD part on the market over a year earlier.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two products serve entirely different purposes, and the choice between them depends on workload type. The AMD Instinct MI350X is a dedicated compute accelerator with 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, 8.19 TB/s of memory bandwidth, and 288 GB of HBM3e capacity. The NVIDIA N1 20SM is an integrated processor with 12.01 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, 273.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and 128 GB of LPDDR5X capacity. For any compute-heavy task, the AMD part holds a 6.0x advantage in raw floating-point throughput and a 30.0x advantage in memory bandwidth.

The NVIDIA part does have specific advantages in the recorded specification data. It includes 24 ROPs and a 56.30 GPixel/s pixel rate, which the AMD part entirely lacks at 0 MPixel/s. It also includes 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, features absent from the AMD specification. The NVIDIA part has a higher boost clock at 2346 MHz versus 2200 MHz, and it is manufactured on a 5 nm process with a 382 mm² die, which is far smaller than the AMD 2380 mm² die.

The AMD part is designed for data center acceleration with no display outputs, a 1000 W TDP, and OAM Module form factor. The NVIDIA part is designed as an integrated processor with a single HDMI output and unknown power consumption. The AMD part requires a 1400 W suggested PSU, while the NVIDIA part has no suggested PSU listed. The AMD part releases in 2025, while the NVIDIA part releases in 2026.

For users selecting between these two, the recorded data points to the AMD Instinct MI350X for large-scale compute and memory-intensive workloads, and the NVIDIA N1 20SM for tasks that require pixel output, ray tracing hardware, or tensor core acceleration. Neither part supports DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan APIs, so traditional graphics APIs are not available on either.

FAQ

Q: Which product has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X lists 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM lists 12.01 TFLOPS. The AMD part is 6.0x higher in this specification.

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

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X has 288 GB of HBM3e memory, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory. The AMD part offers 2.25x the capacity.

Q: Does either product support traditional graphics APIs?

A: Neither product lists support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan. Both entries show "N/A" for these API fields.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X is manufactured on a 3 nm process, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM is manufactured on a 5 nm process. Both use TSMC as the foundry.

Q: Which product has ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM lists 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores. The AMD Instinct MI350X specification does not list any ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

Q: What are the release dates for these products?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X has a release date of 2025-06-11, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM has a release date of 2026-05-31.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350X wins on every compute and memory metric recorded in the database. Its FP32 throughput of 72.09 TFLOPS is 6.0x the NVIDIA figure. Its FP16 throughput of 72.09 TFLOPS is likewise 6.0x the NVIDIA figure of 12.01 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 2,252.8 GTexel/s is 6.0x the NVIDIA rate of 375.4 GTexel/s. Its memory bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s is 30.0x the NVIDIA bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s. Its memory capacity of 288 GB is 2.25x the NVIDIA capacity of 128 GB. Its shading unit count of 16,384 is 6.4x the NVIDIA count of 2,560. Its TMU count of 1,024 is 6.4x the NVIDIA count of 160.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM wins on pixel output and specialized hardware features. Its pixel rate of 56.30 GPixel/s compares to 0 MPixel/s for the AMD part. Its 24 ROPs compare to 0 for the AMD part. Its 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores have no recorded equivalent on the AMD side. Its boost clock of 2346 MHz exceeds the AMD boost of 2200 MHz by 146 MHz. Its base clock of 741 MHz is lower than the AMD base of 1000 MHz, but the boost advantage stands. The NVIDIA part also includes 1x HDMI output, while the AMD part has no display outputs.

The NVIDIA part has a smaller die at 382 mm² versus 2380 mm², which suggests lower manufacturing cost per wafer, though the database does not record pricing. The NVIDIA part has an active production status, while the AMD part has no production status listed. The NVIDIA part is an IGP form factor, while the AMD part is an OAM Module. The AMD part has a 1000 W TDP and needs a 1400 W suggested PSU, while the NVIDIA TDP is unknown with no suggested PSU listed.

For memory-bound workloads such as large model inference or high-bandwidth data processing, the AMD part dominates. For graphics output, ray tracing, or tensor operations, the NVIDIA part holds the recorded advantages. The AMD part uses HBM3e, while the NVIDIA part uses LPDDR5X, and the bus widths of 8192 bit versus 256 bit explain the bandwidth gap.

Specification Differences

The two products differ across nearly every specification field in the database. The AMD Instinct MI350X uses the MI350 256CU chip with CDNA 4.0 architecture, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM uses the GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture. The AMD process node is 3 nm, the NVIDIA node is 5 nm. The AMD die size is 2380 mm² with 185,000 million transistors, while the NVIDIA die size is 382 mm² with unknown transistor count. Transistor density is 77.7M per mm² for the AMD part and null for the NVIDIA part.

Clock specifications differ: AMD base clock is 1000 MHz, NVIDIA base clock is 741 MHz. AMD boost clock is 2200 MHz, NVIDIA boost clock is 2346 MHz. Memory clock is 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) for AMD and 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA. Memory size is 288 GB HBM3e for AMD and 128 GB LPDDR5X for NVIDIA. Bus width is 8192 bit for AMD and 256 bit for NVIDIA. Bandwidth is 8.19 TB/s for AMD and 273.2 GB/s for NVIDIA.

Shading units: 16,384 for AMD, 2,560 for NVIDIA. TMUs: 1,024 for AMD, 160 for NVIDIA. ROPs: 0 for AMD, 24 for NVIDIA. Ray tracing cores: null for AMD, 20 for NVIDIA. Tensor cores: null for AMD, 80 for NVIDIA. Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s for AMD, 56.30 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate: 2,252.8 GTexel/s for AMD, 375.4 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32: 72.09 TFLOPS for AMD, 12.01 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16: 72.09 TFLOPS (1:1) for both, but the AMD absolute figure is 6.0x higher.

TDP is 1000 W for AMD and unknown for NVIDIA. Slot width is OAM Module for AMD and IGP for NVIDIA. Power connectors are None for both. Suggested PSU is 1400 W for AMD and null for NVIDIA. Bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 for both. Display outputs: No outputs for AMD, 1x HDMI for NVIDIA. APIs are N/A for all three (DirectX, OpenGL, Vulkan) on both products.

Dimensions: AMD length is 102 mm (4 inches), width is 165 mm (6.5 inches), height is null. NVIDIA dimensions are all null. Production status is null for AMD and Active for NVIDIA. Release date is 2025-06-11 for AMD and 2026-05-31 for NVIDIA. Predecessor is Radeon Instinct for AMD and null for NVIDIA. Successor is null for both. Launch MSRP is null for both. Percentile vs all GPUs is 50 for both, and average benchmark score is 0 for both.