AMD Instinct MI355X vs AMD Radeon PRO W7700 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Instinct MI355X and AMD Radeon PRO W7700 serve fundamentally different purposes. The MI355X is a datacenter accelerator with no display outputs, while the W7700 is a workstation GPU with four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The database places the MI355X at the 50th percentile among all GPUs with no recorded benchmark scores, whereas the W7700 sits at the 95th percentile with an average benchmark score of 118,976. For any workload requiring graphics output, the W7700 is the only option. For compute-only deployments, the MI355X offers vastly larger memory and bandwidth, but its lack of measured performance data means the W7700 remains the only one with verified benchmark results.

Architecture Differences

The MI355X uses the MI350 256CU chip built on CDNA 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The package contains 185,000 million transistors across a 2380 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 77.7 million per mm². The W7700 uses the Navi 32 chip based on RDNA 3.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a 5 nm process. It integrates 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, achieving a higher density of 81.2 million per mm².

The MI355X has 16,384 shading units, 1,024 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs, resulting in a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s and a texture rate of 2,457.6 GTexel/s. The W7700 has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 48 ray tracing cores, delivering 249.6 GPixel/s and 499.2 GTexel/s. The MI355X reports no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, while the W7700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Memory subsystems diverge sharply. The MI355X uses 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The W7700 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, providing 576.0 GB/s. Clock speeds also differ: the MI355X runs at 1000 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, while the W7700 runs at 1900 MHz base and 2600 MHz boost. The MI355X memory runs at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective, the W7700 at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

Where Each One Wins

The W7700 wins in every measured category because it has actual benchmark data. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 108,245, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 129,706. The MI355X has no recorded benchmarks, no average score, and no nearest rivals in the database. The W7700 outperforms the NVIDIA GB10 by 1.3 percent, the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation by 1.6 percent, the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 4 percent, and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile by 4.4 percent in average benchmark score.

The MI355X wins on raw hardware specifications. Its FP32 compute of 78.64 TFLOPS more than doubles the W7700's 31.95 TFLOPS. Its FP16 performance is 78.64 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the W7700 reaches 63.90 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The MI355X has 288 GB of memory versus 16 GB, 8.19 TB/s bandwidth versus 576.0 GB/s, and 16,384 shading units versus 3,072. The MI355X also uses PCIe 5.0 x16 versus the W7700's PCIe 4.0 x16.

The W7700 wins on power efficiency and physical integration. It draws 190 W TDP against the MI355X's 1400 W TDP. The W7700 requires a 450 W suggested PSU, while the MI355X asks for 1800 W. The W7700 fits in a dual-slot form factor with a single 8-pin power connector and measures 241 mm by 111 mm. The MI355X comes as an OAM module with no power connectors, measuring 102 mm by 165 mm, and has no display outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X delivers 78.64 TFLOPS FP32, more than double the Radeon PRO W7700's 31.95 TFLOPS.

Q: Which GPU supports display outputs?

A: Only the Radeon PRO W7700 has display outputs, specifically four DisplayPort 2.1 connections. The Instinct MI355X has no outputs.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The MI355X provides 8.19 TB/s via 288 GB HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus. The W7700 provides 576.0 GB/s via 16 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: What is the W7700's average benchmark score?

A: The W7700 has an average benchmark score of 118,976, derived from Geekbench OpenCL at 108,245 and Geekbench Vulkan at 129,706.

Q: Does the MI355X have any benchmark results in the database?

A: No. The MI355X has no recorded benchmark scores, no average score, and no nearest rivals listed.

Q: What are the API differences between the two?

A: The W7700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI355X reports N/A for all three APIs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the MI355X and W7700, and the MI355X has zero wins while the W7700 also has zero wins in head-to-head comparisons. This absence of measured data for the MI355X is the defining characteristic of this comparison.

The W7700's recorded benchmarks establish a baseline. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 108,245 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 129,706 combine to an average of 118,976. Against its nearest rivals, the W7700 leads the NVIDIA GB10 by 1.3 percent, the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation by 1.6 percent, the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 4 percent, and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile by 4.4 percent.

The MI355X cannot be positioned against these rivals because no scores exist. Its hardware specifications, however, indicate compute capability far beyond the W7700. The MI355X's texture rate of 2,457.6 GTexel/s is nearly five times the W7700's 499.2 GTexel/s. Its FP32 throughput of 78.64 TFLOPS is 2.46 times the W7700's 31.95 TFLOPS. Its memory bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s is 14.2 times the W7700's 576.0 GB/s. The MI355X's 185,000 million transistors dwarf the W7700's 28,100 million.

Power consumption scales with capability. The MI355X's 1400 W TDP is 7.4 times the W7700's 190 W. The suggested PSU for the MI355X is 1800 W versus 450 W for the W7700. The MI355X uses an OAM module slot width with no power connectors, while the W7700 is a dual-slot card with one 8-pin connector.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: MI350 256CU versus Navi 32
• Architecture: CDNA 4.0 versus RDNA 3.0
• Codename: None listed versus Wheat Nas
• Generation: Instinct (MIx) versus Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series)
• Process node: 3 nm versus 5 nm
• Transistors: 185,000 million versus 28,100 million
• Die size: 2380 mm² versus 346 mm²
• Transistor density: 77.7M per mm² versus 81.2M per mm²
• Base clock: 1000 MHz versus 1900 MHz
• Boost clock: 2400 MHz versus 2600 MHz
• Memory clock: 2000 MHz 8 Gbps effective versus 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective
• Memory size: 288 GB versus 16 GB
• Memory type: HBM3e versus GDDR6
• Memory bus width: 8192 bit versus 256 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 8.19 TB/s versus 576.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 16,384 versus 3,072
• TMUs: 1,024 versus 192
• ROPs: 0 versus 96
• Ray tracing cores: None listed versus 48
• Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s versus 249.6 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 2,457.6 GTexel/s versus 499.2 GTexel/s
• FP32: 78.64 TFLOPS versus 31.95 TFLOPS
• FP16: 78.64 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 63.90 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 1400 W versus 190 W
• Slot width: OAM Module versus Dual-slot
• Power connectors: None versus 1x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: 1800 W versus 450 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display outputs: No outputs versus 4x DisplayPort 2.1
• APIs: DirectX N/A, OpenGL N/A, Vulkan N/A versus DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4
• Dimensions: 102 mm length, 165 mm width versus 241 mm length, 111 mm height
• Release date: 2025-06-11 versus 2023-11-12
• Predecessor: Radeon Instinct versus Radeon Pro Vega
• Launch MSRP: None listed versus 999 USD
• Percentile vs all GPUs: 50 versus 95
• Average benchmark score: 0 versus 118,976
• Nearest rivals: None versus NVIDIA GB10, NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB, NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile