AMD Instinct MI350X vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350X and NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell occupy distinctly different positions in the benchmark database. The MI350X is recorded with a percentile vs all GPUs of 50 and an average benchmark score of 0, indicating that no benchmark results have been captured for this part in the database. The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell, by contrast, holds a percentile of 98 and an average benchmark score of 182,109 across three recorded tests.

The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell wins in every recorded benchmark category. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 9,579.5. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 254,116. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 282,631. The MI350X has no recorded scores in any of these tests, so the data cannot support any use-case win for the AMD part. The NVIDIA card also carries full API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI350X lists N/A for all three APIs, reinforcing that the RTX PRO 5000 is the only one of the two with measurable client-side graphics capability.

The MI350X does win on memory capacity and bandwidth. It carries 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus for 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, versus 48 GB of GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus for 1.34 TB/s on the RTX PRO 5000. These figures point to a compute-oriented memory subsystem on the AMD side, but without benchmark scores in the database, no performance win can be attributed to it.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators use different process nodes and die designs. The MI350X is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC with 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 77.7 million per mm². The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell uses a 5 nm process at TSMC with 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, for a density of 122.9 million per mm². The AMD chip has more than twice the transistor count and more than three times the die area, but the NVIDIA chip achieves higher density.

The MI350X uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture with the MI350 256CU chip, while the RTX PRO 5000 uses Blackwell 2.0 with the GB202 chip. Shading unit counts differ: 16,384 for the AMD part versus 14,080 for the NVIDIA part. Texture mapping units also favor AMD at 1,024 versus 440. Raster operation units are absent on the MI350X (0), while the RTX PRO 5000 has 160. The RTX PRO 5000 includes 110 ray tracing cores and 440 tensor cores; the MI350X lists no RT cores and no tensor cores in the database.

Clock behavior differs as well. The MI350X runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, with memory at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The RTX PRO 5000 runs at 1740 MHz base and 2377 MHz boost, with memory at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA part boosts higher and starts from a much higher base clock.

Pixel and texture rates separate the two further. The MI350X records a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s and a texture rate of 2,252.8 GTexel/s. The RTX PRO 5000 records 380.3 GPixel/s and 1,045.9 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 compute are both rated at 72.09 TFLOPS (1:1) for the MI350X and 66.94 TFLOPS (1:1) for the RTX PRO 5000. The AMD part has a small raw FP32 advantage, but the NVIDIA part has a functional raster pipeline and display outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head benchmark data is not present in the database. The headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty, and wins are recorded as 0 for both parts. However, the RTX PRO 5000 has standalone benchmark results that can be compared against its nearest rivals, and those figures provide context for the NVIDIA part's standing. Its average benchmark score of 182,109 places it 0.9% behind the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB (183,725), 1.4% behind the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation (184,664), 2.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 D (178,050), and 2.7% behind the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB (187,147). The RTX PRO 5000 sits in a tight cluster near these four accelerators, within roughly 3% of each.

In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RTX PRO 5000 scores 9,579.5. Its Geekbench OpenCL result of 254,116 is notably higher than its Geekbench Vulkan result of 282,631, which is unusual because the Vulkan score exceeds the OpenCL score. The Vulkan result indicates strong compute throughput under that API. The OpenCL result at 254,116 and the average of 182,109 show that the three tests vary widely in score magnitude, with the 3DMark result pulling the average down.

Because the MI350X has no benchmarks recorded, the database cannot establish any comparative performance delta between the two parts. The AMD accelerator's percentile of 50 and average score of 0 are consistent with an entry that has not been exercised by the benchmark suite. The RTX PRO 5000's percentile of 98 places it near the top of all GPUs in the database, while the MI350X sits at the median with no measured results.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell has an average benchmark score of 182,109. The AMD Instinct MI350X has an average benchmark score of 0, with no recorded benchmarks.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The MI350X has 288 GB of HBM3e. The RTX PRO 5000 has 48 GB of GDDR7.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The MI350X delivers 8.19 TB/s over an 8192-bit bus. The RTX PRO 5000 delivers 1.34 TB/s over a 384-bit bus.

Q: Which part has a higher boost clock?

A: The RTX PRO 5000 boosts to 2377 MHz. The MI350X boosts to 2200 MHz.

Q: Does the MI350X support DirectX or Vulkan?

A: The database lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A for the MI350X. The RTX PRO 5000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How does the RTX PRO 5000 compare to the A100 SXM4 80 GB?

A: The RTX PRO 5000 averages 182,109, which is 0.9% behind the A100 SXM4 80 GB at 183,725.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI350X | NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 4.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Chip | MI350 256CU | GB202 |

| Process node | 3 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 185,000 million | 92,200 million |

| Die size | 2380 mm² | 750 mm² |

| Transistor density | 77.7M / mm² | 122.9M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1000 MHz | 1740 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2200 MHz | 2377 MHz |

| Memory clock | 2000 MHz, 8 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz, 28 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 288 GB | 48 GB |

| Memory type | HBM3e | GDDR7 |

| Memory bus | 8192 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 8.19 TB/s | 1.34 TB/s |

| Shading units | 16384 | 14080 |

| TMUs | 1024 | 440 |

| ROPs | 0 | 160 |

| RT cores | None | 110 |

| Tensor cores | None | 440 |

| Pixel rate | 0 MPixel/s | 380.3 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 2,252.8 GTexel/s | 1,045.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 72.09 TFLOPS | 66.94 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 72.09 TFLOPS (1:1) | 66.94 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 1000 W | 300 W |

| Slot width | OAM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | None | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 1400 W | 700 W |

| Display outputs | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1b |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Length | 102 mm (4 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Width | 165 mm (6.5 inches) | 40 mm (1.6 inches) |

| Height | Not listed | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Release date | 2025-06-11 | 2025-03-17 |

| Production status | Not listed | Active |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 5,099 USD |

| Percentile vs all GPUs | 50 | 98 |

| Average benchmark score | 0 | 182,109 |

The RTX PRO 5000 is the only one of the two with display outputs, a raster pipeline, graphics API support, a production status, and a launch MSRP in the database. The MI350X is a compute module with no display output and no measured benchmark results, while the RTX PRO 5000 is an active workstation card with three recorded benchmark scores. The raw FP32 figures favor the AMD part by 5.15 TFLOPS, but the NVIDIA part carries the full set of graphics features and a much higher percentile ranking.