AMD Instinct MI350X vs NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Instinct MI350X and the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU. Both entries report an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs, which reflects the absence of standardized test data rather than parity in performance. The MI350X lists no nearest rivals, and the Switch 2 GPU likewise has no comparative scores in the database.

What the available data does show is the raw compute ceiling of each part. The AMD Instinct MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU delivers 4.301 TFLOPS. That places the MI350X at roughly 16.8 times the FP32 rate of the Switch 2 GPU, a gap driven by the difference in shading units: 16,384 versus 1,536. The MI350X also reaches 2,252.8 GTexel/s of texture fill rate against 67.20 GTexel/s for the Switch 2 GPU, a multiplier of about 33.5. Pixel rate tells a different story: the MI350X records 0 MPixel/s because it has no ROPs, whereas the Switch 2 GPU outputs 22.40 GPixel/s from its 16 ROPs.

Memory bandwidth separates the two by an even wider margin. The MI350X uses 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus for 8.19 TB/s, versus 12 GB of LPDDR5X on a 128-bit bus for 102.4 GB/s. That is an 80-fold difference in bandwidth, which makes sense given the MI350X is an accelerator module designed for massive data movement while the Switch 2 GPU is a mobile console part.

The FP16 comparison introduces a nuance. The MI350X lists FP16 at 72.09 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, meaning no rate advantage for reduced precision. The Switch 2 GPU lists FP16 at 8.602 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, doubling its FP32 throughput. Even so, the MI350X still leads in FP16 by a factor of roughly 8.4. The Switch 2 GPU adds dedicated ray tracing cores (12) and tensor cores (48), features that the MI350X does not enumerate in its specification fields.

Clock behavior also differs sharply. The MI350X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost of 2200 MHz. The Switch 2 GPU runs a 561 MHz base and 1400 MHz boost. The higher boost on the MI350X, combined with far more execution resources, explains the TFLOPS gap despite both parts using similar boost multipliers relative to their bases.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X has 16,384 shading units. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU has 1,536 shading units, which is roughly one-tenth the count.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare?

A: The MI350X reaches 8.19 TB/s over an 8192-bit HBM3e interface, while the Switch 2 GPU provides 102.4 GB/s over a 128-bit LPDDR5X interface. The MI350X delivers approximately 80 times the bandwidth.

Q: Does either GPU support ray tracing or tensor operations?

A: The Switch 2 GPU includes 12 ray tracing cores and 48 tensor cores. The MI350X specification lists no RT cores and no tensor cores in the database.

Q: What is the release timing for each product?

A: The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU has a release date of 2025-06-04, and the AMD Instinct MI350X follows with a release date of 2025-06-11. Both are from the same year, one week apart.

Q: What is the process node and foundry for each chip?

A: The MI350X uses a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Switch 2 GPU uses an 8 nm process at Samsung.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The MI350X has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The Switch 2 GPU has a TDP of 40 W and no listed suggested PSU.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural lineages. The AMD Instinct MI350X is built on CDNA 4.0, a compute-focused design aimed at accelerators. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU is built on Ampere, a consumer-oriented architecture adapted for a console. This is not a minor revision; it is a fundamental split in design goals.

The MI350X uses a 3 nm process at TSMC and packs 185,000 million transistors onto a 2380 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 77.7 million per square millimeter. The Switch 2 GPU uses an 8 nm process at Samsung with an unknown transistor count and a 200 mm² die. The die size difference alone, 2380 mm² versus 200 mm², indicates the MI350X is in a different physical class, roughly 11.9 times larger. The MI350X has no listed transistor density for comparison, but the process node gap (3 nm versus 8 nm) suggests the MI350X achieves higher density despite the larger area.

The MI350X belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation with a chip identifier of MI350 256CU. The Switch 2 GPU is part of the Console GPU (Nintendo) generation with a GA10B chip. The MI350X has a predecessor listed as Radeon Instinct, while the Switch 2 GPU has no predecessor in the database. Neither part has a successor recorded.

Memory architecture diverges completely. The MI350X uses HBM3e across an 8192-bit bus, a stack-based design for high bandwidth. The Switch 2 GPU uses LPDDR5X across a 128-bit bus, a conventional mobile memory layout. The MI350X memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective, while the Switch 2 GPU memory clock is 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective. The MI350X memory bus width is 64 times wider, which drives the bandwidth advantage.

The MI350X has no ROPs and reports a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, consistent with a compute accelerator that does not rasterize. The Switch 2 GPU has 16 ROPs and a 22.40 GPixel/s pixel rate, confirming it is designed for traditional graphics output. The MI350X has 1024 TMUs versus 48 TMUs on the Switch 2 GPU. The MI350X texture rate of 2,252.8 GTexel/s exceeds the Switch 2 GPU’s 67.20 GTexel/s by a factor of 33.5.

API support separates them further. The MI350X lists no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan. The Switch 2 GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This confirms the MI350X is not intended for standard graphics workloads, while the Switch 2 GPU carries full consumer graphics API compatibility.

Physical dimensions differ as well. The MI350X is an OAM Module with dimensions of 102 mm length and 165 mm width, with no height listed. The Switch 2 GPU measures 272 mm length, 116 mm height, and 14 mm width. The Switch 2 GPU is a board-level component, while the MI350X is a modular accelerator.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two GPUs differ, per the database records.

| Field | AMD Instinct MI350X | NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 4.0 | Ampere |

| Generation | Instinct (MIx) | Console GPU (Nintendo) |

| Chip | MI350 256CU | GA10B |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 185,000 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 2380 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 77.7M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 561 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2200 MHz | 1400 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz 8 Gbps effective | 800 MHz 6.4 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 288 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3e | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 8.19 TB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 16384 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 1024 | 48 |

| ROPs | 0 | 16 |

| RT Cores | null | 12 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 48 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 22.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,252.8 GTexel/s | 67.20 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 72.09 TFLOPS | 4.301 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 72.09 TFLOPS (1:1) | 8.602 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 1000 W | 40 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | null |

| Power Connectors | None | null |

| Suggested PSU | 1400 W | null |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | null |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | No outputs |

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

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Length | 102 mm 4 inches | 272 mm 10.7 inches |

| Height | null | 116 mm 4.6 inches |

| Width | 165 mm 6.5 inches | 14 mm 0.6 inches |

| Production Status | null | Active |

| Release Date | 2025-06-11 | 2025-06-04 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | null |

| Launch MSRP | null | 449 USD |

The Verdict

The data separates these two GPUs into distinct roles with no overlap. The AMD Instinct MI350X is a compute accelerator. It carries 16,384 shading units, 288 GB of HBM3e, 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, and 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. It has no ROPs, no display outputs, no graphics API support, and a 1000 W TDP. Its specifications point to server-side training and inference workloads where raw math throughput and memory capacity matter more than rasterization.

The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU is a console part. It has 1,536 shading units, 12 GB of LPDDR5X, 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, and 4.301 TFLOPS of FP32. It includes 12 ray tracing cores, 48 tensor cores, 16 ROPs, full DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and a 40 W TDP. Its release date precedes the MI350X by one week, and it has an active production status with a launch MSRP of 449 USD. The Switch 2 GPU is built for graphics rendering within a fixed power envelope.

For compute-heavy tasks, the MI350X dominates every measured metric: 16.8 times the FP32 rate, 33.5 times the texture rate, and 80 times the memory bandwidth. For graphics output, the Switch 2 GPU is the only one of the two with functional pixel processing and API compatibility. The MI350X cannot produce frames, and the Switch 2 GPU cannot approach the MI350X’s throughput.

The choice between them is not a performance tier decision but a workload decision. A system requiring massive parallel compute with no display output should use the MI350X. A system requiring a compact, low-power GPU with ray tracing, tensor cores, and standard graphics APIs should use the Switch 2 GPU. The database records no head-to-head benchmarks, so any direct comparison must rely on the specification deltas, which are unambiguous in their direction.