AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D vs Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D or the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100. Both cards have an average benchmark score of zero, and their percentile rankings against all GPUs are identical at the 50th percentile. Without measured performance data, direct head-to-head comparisons must rely on the architectural and specification differences documented in the database rather than empirical results.

The raw compute figures provide the first meaningful contrast. The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D delivers 24.82 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and the same 24.82 TFLOPS of FP16 performance, with a 1:1 ratio between the two. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 outputs 22.22 TFLOPS of FP32 and an equal 22.22 TFLOPS of FP16, also at a 1:1 ratio. This places the AMD part roughly 11.7% ahead of the Intel part in raw floating-point throughput, a meaningful margin for compute-heavy workloads even before considering other factors.

Memory bandwidth tells the opposite story. The Intel card uses HBM2e memory across an 8192-bit bus, producing 1.23 TB/s of bandwidth. The AMD card uses GDDR6 across a 256-bit bus, yielding 576.0 GB/s. The Intel part holds more than twice the memory bandwidth, a decisive advantage for memory-bound operations such as large matrix multiplications or data movement across a GPU cluster. The Intel card also carries 48 GB of memory versus 32 GB on the AMD card, a 50% capacity advantage.

Pixel throughput appears as a stark divergence. The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D records a pixel rate of 193.9 GPixel/s, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 records 0 MPixel/s. This reflects the absence of any display outputs on the Intel card; it is not designed to drive a screen. The AMD card includes a single DisplayPort 2.1a output, making it the only one of the two that can present rendered frames directly to a monitor.

Texture throughput favors Intel. The Intel card delivers 694.4 GTexel/s from its 448 texture mapping units, while the AMD card delivers 387.8 GTexel/s from 192 TMUs. This gives Intel roughly 79% higher texture fill rate, which can matter in geometry-heavy or texture-sampling scenarios even if the AMD card holds the raw FP32 lead.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D wins in scenarios that stress raw floating-point compute density and power efficiency. Its 24.82 TFLOPS FP32 figure exceeds the Intel card by about 2.6 TFLOPS, and it does so within a 150 W TDP compared to the Intel card's 300 W TDP. The recorded data shows the AMD card draws half the power envelope while delivering higher peak FP32 throughput. The AMD card also brings a single-slot form factor, a 16-pin power connector with a 450 W suggested PSU, and a 241 mm length, all of which point to easier integration into workstations that already have display output requirements.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 wins in memory capacity, memory bandwidth, texture throughput, and sheer scale. Its 48 GB of HBM2e and 1.23 TB/s bandwidth make it the stronger choice for datasets that exceed 32 GB or workloads that saturate a 576.0 GB/s pipe. The 8192-bit bus is an order of magnitude wider than the AMD card's 256-bit bus. The Intel card also has 7168 shading units versus 3072, 448 TMUs versus 192, and 56 ray tracing cores versus 48. The transistor count tells a similar scale story: 100,000 million transistors on Intel's Ponte Vecchio chip versus 53,900 million on AMD's Navi 48.

The Intel card does not output video at all, so it cannot serve as a primary display adapter. Its 0 MPixel/s pixel rate and "No outputs" entry in the database make its server-only intent explicit. The AMD card, with its DisplayPort 2.1a output and 193.9 GPixel/s pixel rate, can function in a workstation where rendering and display happen on the same card.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different foundries and different design philosophies. AMD uses TSMC's 4 nm process for the Navi 48 chip, with RDNA 4.0 architecture. Intel uses its own 10 nm process for Ponte Vecchio, built on Generation 12.5 architecture. The die sizes differ enormously: AMD's chip measures 357 mm², while Intel's measures 1280 mm². Transistor density also diverges, with AMD at 151.0 million transistors per square millimeter versus Intel at 78.1 million per square millimeter.

The memory subsystems could hardly be more different. AMD pairs 32 GB of GDDR6 with a 256-bit bus and 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. Intel pairs 48 GB of HBM2e with an 8192-bit bus and 1.23 TB/s bandwidth. The memory clock rates reflect the different technologies: AMD runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), while Intel runs at 600 MHz (1200 Mbps effective). The much higher effective clock on the AMD card does not overcome the bandwidth advantage of Intel's extremely wide HBM2e implementation.

Ray tracing hardware exists on both, with AMD listing 48 RT cores and Intel listing 56. Neither card lists dedicated tensor cores in the database, so any AI acceleration claims would rest on the FP16/FP32 compute paths rather than matrix-specific units. Both cards support PCIe 5.0 x16.

API support differs in notable ways. AMD lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Intel lists DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and no Vulkan entry. The DirectX feature level difference (12_2 versus 12_1) reflects newer hardware capabilities on the AMD side, including features tied to the 12 Ultimate specification.

Physical design separates them further. The AMD card is single-slot, 241 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 19 mm wide, with a 1x 16-pin power connector and a 450 W suggested PSU. The Intel card is dual-slot, 267 mm long, with a 1x 12-pin power connector and a 700 W suggested PSU. The AMD card has one DisplayPort 2.1a output; the Intel card has no outputs at all.

Release timing also differs. The database records the AMD card's release date as December 10, 2025, while the Intel card's release date is January 9, 2023. The Intel card lists a successor, H3C Graphics, while the AMD card lists no successor. The AMD card's predecessor is listed as Radeon Pro Vega.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D records 24.82 TFLOPS of FP32, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 records 22.22 TFLOPS. The AMD card holds an advantage of roughly 2.6 TFLOPS.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has 1.23 TB/s of bandwidth from its 8192-bit HBM2e interface. The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D has 576.0 GB/s from its 256-bit GDDR6 interface, so Intel holds more than a 2x bandwidth lead.

Q: Can either card drive a display?

A: Only the AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D has display outputs, listed as one DisplayPort 2.1a connector. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has no outputs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, so it cannot drive a monitor.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The AMD card has a 150 W TDP and a 450 W suggested PSU. The Intel card has a 300 W TDP and a 700 W suggested PSU. The AMD card uses a 16-pin connector, while the Intel card uses a 12-pin connector.

Q: Which card has more memory capacity?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has 48 GB of HBM2e, while the AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D has 32 GB of GDDR6. Intel offers 16 GB more capacity.

Q: Do both cards support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The AMD card lists 48 ray tracing cores, and the Intel card lists 56 ray tracing cores. Neither card lists tensor cores in the database.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards in the recorded data:

• Chip: AMD uses Navi 48; Intel uses Ponte Vecchio.
• Architecture: AMD uses RDNA 4.0; Intel uses Generation 12.5.
• Process node: AMD uses 4 nm from TSMC; Intel uses 10 nm from Intel.
• Transistors: AMD lists 53,900 million; Intel lists 100,000 million.
• Die size: AMD measures 357 mm²; Intel measures 1280 mm².
• Transistor density: AMD lists 151.0 million per mm²; Intel lists 78.1 million per mm².
• Base clock: AMD at 1080 MHz; Intel at 1000 MHz.
• Boost clock: AMD at 2020 MHz; Intel at 1550 MHz.
• Memory size: AMD has 32 GB; Intel has 48 GB.
• Memory type: AMD uses GDDR6; Intel uses HBM2e.
• Memory bus width: AMD uses 256 bit; Intel uses 8192 bit.
• Memory bandwidth: AMD at 576.0 GB/s; Intel at 1.23 TB/s.
• Shading units: AMD has 3072; Intel has 7168.
• TMUs: AMD has 192; Intel has 448.
• ROPs: AMD has 96; Intel has 0.
• Ray tracing cores: AMD has 48; Intel has 56.
• Pixel rate: AMD at 193.9 GPixel/s; Intel at 0 MPixel/s.
• Texture rate: AMD at 387.8 GTexel/s; Intel at 694.4 GTexel/s.
• FP32: AMD at 24.82 TFLOPS; Intel at 22.22 TFLOPS.
• FP16: AMD at 24.82 TFLOPS; Intel at 22.22 TFLOPS.
• TDP: AMD at 150 W; Intel at 300 W.
• Slot width: AMD single-slot; Intel dual-slot.
• Power connectors: AMD uses 1x 16-pin; Intel uses 1x 12-pin.
• Suggested PSU: AMD at 450 W; Intel at 700 W.
• Display outputs: AMD has 1x DisplayPort 2.1a; Intel has no outputs.
• DirectX support: AMD lists 12 Ultimate (12_2); Intel lists 12 (12_1).
• Vulkan support: AMD lists 1.4; Intel lists none.
• Dimensions: AMD is 241 mm long, 111 mm tall, 19 mm wide; Intel is 267 mm long with no recorded height or width.
• Release date: AMD on December 10, 2025; Intel on January 9, 2023.
• Predecessor: AMD lists Radeon Pro Vega; Intel lists none.
• Successor: AMD lists none; Intel lists H3C Graphics.

The Verdict

The recorded data separates these two cards cleanly by intended role. The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D is a workstation-capable card with display output, a modest 150 W TDP, and higher FP32 throughput at 24.82 TFLOPS. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 is a server compute card with no display path, double the power draw at 300 W, and a decisive memory advantage at 48 GB and 1.23 TB/s.

For a workstation that must render frames and show them on a screen, the AMD card is the only option with a display output and a functional pixel rate. Its 4 nm TSMC process, smaller die, and lower power requirement also make it the easier card to install in a single-slot, 450 W PSU environment.

For compute workloads that need large resident datasets or very high memory bandwidth, the Intel card has the clear edge. The 8192-bit HBM2e interface and 48 GB capacity exceed the AMD card's GDDR6 limits by a wide margin, and the higher texture rate of 694.4 GTexel/s supports texture-heavy processing. The trade-off is a dual-slot footprint, a 700 W suggested PSU, and no way to drive a monitor.

With no benchmark scores in the database, the choice rests on these measured specifications. AMD wins on compute efficiency, display capability, and modern API support. Intel wins on memory capacity, memory bandwidth, shading unit count, and texture throughput. The right pick depends entirely on whether the workload needs a display or needs to move large amounts of data quickly.