AMD Instinct MI355X vs Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct benchmark scores for either the AMD Instinct MI355X or the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile. Both products hold a percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of zero. This means the two units cannot be compared through raw performance measurements in the current dataset. Instead, the comparison must rely entirely on the architectural specifications and memory characteristics recorded for each part.

The AMD Instinct MI355X delivers a peak FP32 throughput of 78.64 TFLOPS, while the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile reaches 307.2 GFLOPS. Expressing these figures in the same unit, the MI355X provides 78,640 GFLOPS, which is approximately 256 times higher than the Intel part. For FP16 workloads, the MI355X again lists 78.64 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not gain a throughput advantage when switching to reduced precision. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile, by contrast, reaches 614.4 GFLOPS in FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, effectively doubling its FP32 rate. Even with that doubling, the Intel part still trails the AMD accelerator by more than two orders of magnitude.

Texture throughput follows a similar pattern. The MI355X records 2,457.6 GTexel/s, while the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile records 9.600 GTexel/s. The AMD part is roughly 256 times faster in texture operations, matching the FP32 ratio. Pixel throughput, however, is listed as 0 MPixel/s for the MI355X, because the accelerator has no display outputs and no raster operation units (ROPs). The Intel part shows 4.800 GPixel/s, a figure that reflects its role as an integrated graphics processor capable of driving portable device displays. This means the Intel GPU is the only one of the two with a measurable pixel rate, despite being far slower in compute and texture work.

Memory bandwidth is another area where the two parts diverge completely. The MI355X uses 288 GB of HBM3e memory across an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. No numeric value is recorded for the Intel part's memory bandwidth, so a direct comparison cannot be made. The AMD accelerator's memory bus width of 8192 bits versus the Intel part's system shared interface indicates a fundamental difference in how each GPU accesses data.

The average benchmark score of zero for both items suggests that no performance samples have been submitted to the database for either product. This absence of measured data means all conclusions in this comparison derive from the recorded specifications, not from executed workloads. The wins in this head-to-head are therefore structural: the MI355X wins on compute throughput, texture rate, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile wins on pixel rate and on the availability of a functional display output path.

# Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI355X is designed for computations that demand massive parallel throughput and enormous memory capacity. Its FP32 and FP16 figures of 78.64 TFLOPS indicate that it can handle dense matrix operations, scientific simulations, and large-scale data processing without relying on specialized tensor cores, which are not listed in the data. The 288 GB of HBM3e memory with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth supports datasets that would not fit in the memory of any integrated GPU. The 16384 shading units, 1024 texture mapping units, and 102 mm by 165 mm OAM module form factor confirm that this is an accelerator meant for server racks, not desktop or mobile systems.

The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile wins in scenarios where power consumption and display output matter. Its 15 W TDP is a fraction of the MI355X's 1400 W TDP, making it suitable for battery-powered portable devices. The integrated design, listed as IGP with a ring bus interface, means it shares system memory and requires no separate power connectors. Its 4.800 GPixel/s pixel rate and portable device dependent display outputs enable it to drive screens, something the MI355X cannot do, as it has no display outputs at all. The Intel part also supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI355X lists N/A for all three APIs, indicating that the AMD accelerator is not intended for graphics rendering or gaming.

For workloads such as machine learning training, scientific computing, or real-time data analytics, the MI355X is the only viable option from the recorded data. For routine desktop tasks, video playback, or light graphics acceleration in a mobile device, the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile provides the necessary functionality. Neither part can substitute for the other in its respective domain. The MI355X has no display outputs and no graphics API support, so it cannot produce a visual output. The Intel part lacks the compute density and memory bandwidth to approach the MI355X's performance in parallel workloads.

The production status also separates the two. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile is listed as active, with a release date of January 3, 2023, and a successor named Arc Graphics-M. The MI355X has no production status recorded, but its release date of June 11, 2025, and its predecessor designation of Radeon Instinct suggest a recent addition to the Instinct product line. The Intel part is an established integrated solution, while the MI355X represents a current-generation accelerator.

# Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and use entirely different architectures. The AMD Instinct MI355X is built on CDNA 4.0, using a chip designated MI350 256CU, fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile uses Generation 12.2 architecture, based on Raptor Lake, and is fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process. The AMD part integrates 185,000 million transistors on a die size of 2380 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 77.7 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel part has no recorded transistor count, die size, or density, so those parameters cannot be compared.

The compute resources differ by a factor of 128 in shading units: the MI355X has 16384, while the Intel part has 128. Texture mapping units number 1024 versus 8, and ROPs are 0 versus 4. The MI355X has no ROPs because it is not designed for rasterization, while the Intel part has a small number to support display rendering. Neither part lists ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so any claims about those features cannot be made from the database.

Clock speeds show a large gap. The MI355X operates at a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The Intel part runs at 300 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost. The AMD part's memory clock is 2000 MHz, with 8 Gbps effective data rate, while the Intel part uses system shared memory with no dedicated clock listed. The power requirements reflect the performance disparity: the MI355X has a TDP of 1400 W and a suggested PSU of 1800 W, while the Intel part has a TDP of 15 W and no suggested PSU listed.

The bus interface also differs. The MI355X uses PCIe 5.0 x16, a high-bandwidth external connection suitable for server installations. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile uses a ring bus, which connects the integrated GPU to the rest of the processor without a separate expansion slot. The MI355X is an OAM module, measuring 102 mm by 165 mm, while the Intel part is an IGP with no dimensions recorded.

Memory architecture is a fundamental split. The MI355X has dedicated HBM3e memory totaling 288 GB, with a bus width of 8192 bits. The Intel part uses system shared memory, with the bus width and type both labeled as system shared. The AMD part's bandwidth is fixed at 8.19 TB/s, while the Intel part's bandwidth is system dependent, meaning it varies based on the host platform's memory configuration.

The API support further distinguishes the two. The MI355X lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A, indicating no graphics API support. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. These figures confirm that the MI355X is a compute accelerator, while the Intel part is a full graphics processor.

# The Verdict

The data shows two products with no overlap in purpose. The AMD Instinct MI355X is a compute accelerator with 78.64 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, 288 GB of HBM3e memory, and 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. Its 1400 W TDP and OAM module form factor place it in server and data center environments. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile is an integrated graphics processor with 307.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, system shared memory, and a 15 W TDP. Its active production status and release date of January 3, 2023, indicate an ongoing product for mobile devices.

A user or system builder selecting between these two parts is choosing between two entirely different classes of hardware. The MI355X is appropriate for workloads that require massive parallel compute and large memory footprints, such as large-scale model training or scientific simulation. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile is appropriate for portable devices that need basic display output and light graphics acceleration with minimal power draw.

The absence of benchmark scores in the database means that no measured performance comparison is available. The percentile ranking of 50 for both parts is an artifact of the lack of benchmark data, not an indication of equal performance. The specification data clearly indicates that the MI355X outperforms the Intel part in compute and memory throughput by several orders of magnitude, while the Intel part outperforms the MI355X in pixel rate and display functionality.

The MI355X has no display outputs, no graphics API support, and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. It cannot be used to render a desktop or output video. The Intel part has portable device dependent display outputs and supports current graphics APIs. It cannot approach the compute density or memory bandwidth of the MI355X. The choice is dictated by the workload, not by preference.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X has an FP32 throughput of 78.64 TFLOPS, while the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile has 307.2 GFLOPS. The AMD part is approximately 256 times faster in FP32.

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI355X support DirectX or Vulkan?

A: No. The MI355X lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X has 288 GB of HBM3e memory with an 8192-bit bus. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile uses system shared memory, with no dedicated capacity listed.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The MI355X has a TDP of 1400 W and a suggested PSU of 1800 W. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile has a TDP of 15 W and no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Can the AMD Instinct MI355X output video to a display?

A: No. The MI355X has no display outputs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile has portable device dependent display outputs and a pixel rate of 4.800 GPixel/s.

Q: What are the release dates for these products?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X has a release date of June 11, 2025. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile has a release date of January 3, 2023.

# Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two products, as recorded in the database.

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI355X | Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 4.0 | Generation 12.2 |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 185,000 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 2380 mm² | Not recorded |

| Transistor Density | 77.7M / mm² | Not recorded |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2400 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Memory Size | 288 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | HBM3e | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 8.19 TB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 16384 | 128 |

| TMUs | 1024 | 8 |

| ROPs | 0 | 4 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 4.800 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,457.6 GTexel/s | 9.600 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 78.64 TFLOPS | 307.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 78.64 TFLOPS (1:1) | 614.4 GFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 1400 W | 15 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | Not recorded |

| Suggested PSU | 1800 W | Not recorded |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | 102 mm x 165 mm | Not recorded |

| Production Status | Not recorded | Active |

| Release Date | 2025-06-11 | 2023-01-03 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | Not recorded |

| Successor | Not recorded | Arc Graphics-M |