AMD Instinct MI355X vs Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no benchmark scores for either the AMD Instinct MI355X or the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero, and the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. This absence of measured performance data means direct comparison must rely entirely on the architectural and specification fields present in the database.

The AMD Instinct MI355X delivers 78.64 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 delivers 52.43 TFLOPS. The AMD part leads by roughly 26.21 TFLOPS, a 50% advantage in raw single-precision throughput. FP16 performance mirrors this exactly, with the AMD card again posting 78.64 TFLOPS versus Intel's 52.43 TFLOPS, both at a 1:1 ratio.

Texture throughput follows the same pattern. The AMD Instinct MI355X achieves 2,457.6 GTexel/s, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 reaches 1,638.4 GTexel/s. Both cards have 1,024 texture mapping units, so the difference comes entirely from clock speed and architecture efficiency rather than unit count.

Memory bandwidth tells a similar story. The AMD card accesses 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel card manages 3.28 TB/s. This 4.91 TB/s gap represents a 150% bandwidth advantage for the AMD Instinct MI355X. Both use 8192-bit memory buses, so the difference stems from memory type and effective data rates: the AMD part uses HBM3e at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective), while the Intel part uses HBM2e at 1600 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective).

Clock speeds favor AMD as well. The Instinct MI355X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 runs at 900 MHz base and 1600 MHz boost. The boost clock difference of 800 MHz is substantial, and the base clock difference of 100 MHz is minor but present.

Both cards share identical shading unit counts at 16,384 and identical TMU counts at 1,024. Neither card has any ROPs, and both report a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The Intel card includes 128 ray tracing cores, while the AMD card lists none in the database. Neither card lists tensor core counts.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI355X wins in every measured compute and memory category present in the database. FP32 performance, FP16 performance, texture rate, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and clock speeds all favor the AMD part. The AMD card also uses a newer fabrication process and a newer architecture generation.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 holds advantages in a few specific areas. It includes 128 ray tracing cores, which the AMD card does not list at all. The Intel part also has API support entries: DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, while the AMD card shows N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The Intel card is listed as Active in production status, while the AMD card has no production status recorded.

Power consumption is dramatically different. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has a TDP of 600 W and a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The AMD Instinct MI355X has a TDP of 1400 W and a suggested PSU of 1800 W. This means the Intel card requires 800 W less in TDP and 800 W less in suggested PSU capacity. For deployments where power delivery or thermal management is constrained, the Intel part has a clear structural advantage.

Memory capacity also shows a major split. The AMD card carries 288 GB of HBM3e, while the Intel card carries 128 GB of HBM2e. The AMD part provides 160 GB more memory, which is a 125% capacity increase. The Intel card's memory type is two generations older, and its effective data rate of 3.2 Gbps is less than half of the AMD card's 8 Gbps.

Transistor counts differ notably. The AMD Instinct MI355X contains 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 contains 100,000 million transistors on a 1280 mm² die. The transistor density is nearly identical: 77.7M per mm² for AMD versus 78.1M per mm² for Intel. This suggests both designs push similar density limits, but AMD does so on a 3 nm TSMC process while Intel uses a 10 nm Intel process.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI355X uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The chip is designated MI350 256CU. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 uses Generation 12.5 architecture, built on a 10 nm process at Intel, with the chip named Ponte Vecchio.

The process node difference is significant. AMD's 3 nm process is two generations ahead of Intel's 10 nm process in the database's classification. This explains how AMD achieves substantially higher clock speeds (2400 MHz boost versus 1600 MHz boost) while using more power (1400 W versus 600 W). The AMD part is not more efficient per watt; it simply consumes more than double the power to reach higher performance levels.

Die size and transistor counts reveal different design philosophies. AMD's die measures 2380 mm², which is 1100 mm² larger than Intel's 1280 mm² die. AMD packs 185,000 million transistors into that space, while Intel packs 100,000 million. The density numbers are close, so the larger AMD die primarily enables more transistors and more memory controllers rather than a denser design.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The AMD card uses HBM3e with 8 Gbps effective data rate, delivering 8.19 TB/s across an 8192-bit bus. The Intel card uses HBM2e with 3.2 Gbps effective data rate, delivering 3.28 TB/s across the same 8192-bit bus width. The bus width is identical, but the memory generation and speed create the large bandwidth gap.

Both cards use PCIe 5.0 x16 interfaces. Both are OAM Module slot widths. Neither card has display outputs. The AMD card has no power connectors listed, while the Intel card has no power connector data at all. The AMD card measures 102 mm in length and 165 mm in width, while the Intel card has no dimensions recorded.

API support differs sharply. The Intel card supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The AMD card shows N/A for all three API categories: DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. This suggests the Intel part has some graphics API compatibility, while the AMD part is positioned purely as a compute accelerator with no graphics API exposure in the database.

Release timing differs by roughly two and a half years. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 was released on 2023-01-09, while the AMD Instinct MI355X was released on 2025-06-11. The Intel card lists a successor called H3C Graphics, while the AMD card lists a predecessor called Radeon Instinct and no successor.

The Verdict

The database shows a clear performance hierarchy. The AMD Instinct MI355X outperforms the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 in FP32 compute by 26.21 TFLOPS, in FP16 compute by the same margin, in texture rate by 819.2 GTexel/s, in memory bandwidth by 4.91 TB/s, and in memory capacity by 160 GB. These are not marginal differences; they represent a 50% compute advantage and a 150% bandwidth advantage for the AMD part.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 counters with a 800 W lower TDP, a 800 W lower suggested PSU, 128 ray tracing cores, API support entries, and an Active production status. For environments where power is limited, the Intel card is the only viable option from this data. For environments where maximum compute and memory throughput matter more than power draw, the AMD card dominates every measured compute metric.

The architecture gap explains the performance gap. CDNA 4.0 on 3 nm TSMC process, paired with HBM3e memory, delivers higher clocks and far higher memory throughput. Generation 12.5 on 10 nm Intel process, paired with HBM2e, delivers lower clocks and lower memory throughput. The Intel part's ray tracing cores and API support suggest a different intended role, possibly including graphics-adjacent workloads, while the AMD part's N/A API entries indicate a pure compute focus.

The selection depends on workload priorities. Compute-heavy tasks with large memory footprints favor the AMD Instinct MI355X. Power-constrained deployments or tasks that use ray tracing cores favor the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550. The data does not show a single universal winner; it shows two accelerators with different trade-offs in power, memory, and feature sets.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X delivers 78.64 TFLOPS of FP32, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 delivers 52.43 TFLOPS, a difference of 26.21 TFLOPS.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X uses 288 GB of HBM3e with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 uses 128 GB of HBM2e with 3.28 TB/s bandwidth. Both use an 8192-bit bus.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X has a TDP of 1400 W and a suggested PSU of 1800 W. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has a TDP of 600 W and a suggested PSU of 1000 W.

Q: Does either card support graphics APIs?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 lists DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6 support. The AMD Instinct MI355X shows N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Q: Which card has ray tracing cores?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 includes 128 ray tracing cores. The AMD Instinct MI355X lists no ray tracing cores in the database.

Q: What are the process nodes and transistor counts?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X uses a 3 nm TSMC process with 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 uses a 10 nm Intel process with 100,000 million transistors on a 1280 mm² die.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Instinct MI355X | Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 |

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

| Chip | MI350 256CU | Ponte Vecchio |

| Architecture | CDNA 4.0 | Generation 12.5 |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 185,000 million | 100,000 million |

| Die Size | 2380 mm² | 1280 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 77.7M / mm² | 78.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2400 MHz | 1600 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz 8 Gbps effective | 1600 MHz 3.2 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 288 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3e | HBM2e |

| Memory Bandwidth | 8.19 TB/s | 3.28 TB/s |

| RT Cores | None listed | 128 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 0 MPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,457.6 GTexel/s | 1,638.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 78.64 TFLOPS | 52.43 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 78.64 TFLOPS (1:1) | 52.43 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 1400 W | 600 W |

| Suggested PSU | 1800 W | 1000 W |

| Power Connectors | None | Not listed |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | Not listed |

| Dimensions | 102 mm length, 165 mm width | Not listed |

| Production Status | Not listed | Active |

| Release Date | 2025-06-11 | 2023-01-09 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | None listed |

| Successor | None listed | H3C Graphics |