AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 and AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 share the same Vega 10 silicon, the same GCN 5.0 architecture, and the same 14 nm GlobalFoundries process, yet they are configured for different roles. The data shows a single direct head-to-head benchmark result, with the Radeon Pro Vega 64 taking the win, but the underlying specifications reveal a more nuanced story about how each card is tuned for its intended workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, where the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 scores 71,094 against the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25’s 68,562. That is a 3.7% delta in favor of the Pro Vega 64, making it the sole head-to-head winner with a 1–0 record. While a 3.7% margin is not overwhelming, it is consistent with the clock speed differences between the two cards, as the Pro Vega 64 operates at a lower base clock but achieves a higher score in this compute-oriented test.

Looking at broader context, the Pro Vega 64’s average benchmark score is 72,379, placing it in the 91st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal at 72,098 (0.4% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 6650M at 71,768 (0.9% behind), and the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition at 73,370 (1.4% ahead). The Instinct MI25’s average score is 68,562, which lands it in the 90th percentile, with nearest rivals including the Intel Arc A770 at 68,809 (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA CMP 90HX at 69,000 (0.6% ahead), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 at 69,870 (1.9% ahead). The Pro Vega 64’s 3.7% lead over the Instinct MI25 is therefore larger than the gap between either card and its closest competitors, suggesting the difference is meaningful in real-world compute tasks.

The Pro Vega 64 also has additional benchmark data points: Geekbench Metal at 71,868 and Geekbench Vulkan at 74,174. The Instinct MI25 lacks these results, which means its average score is based solely on the OpenCL run. This missing data matters because the Vulkan score on the Pro Vega 64 is 4.3% higher than its OpenCL score, indicating that the architecture scales well across different API workloads. Without comparable Vulkan or Metal numbers for the Instinct MI25, the overall picture is incomplete, but the available evidence points to the Pro Vega 64 being the faster card in compute.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the Vega 10 chip with 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.3 million per square millimeter. The architecture is GCN 5.0 for both, and they share identical compute resources: 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. Neither card has dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores, which is expected for this generation of GCN architecture. The API support is also identical, with DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 listed for both.

The core difference lies in clock speeds and power delivery. The Instinct MI25 runs at a 1,400 MHz base clock and a 1,500 MHz boost clock, while the Pro Vega 64 operates at 1,250 MHz base and 1,350 MHz boost. That is a 150 MHz advantage for the Instinct MI25 at both clock states, which translates directly into higher peak throughput figures. The Instinct MI25 achieves 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.58 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), while the Pro Vega 64 delivers 11.06 TFLOPS FP32 and 22.12 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The Instinct MI25 is therefore 11.1% ahead in FP32 and 11.1% ahead in FP16, based on the raw clock advantage.

Memory configurations are similar but not identical. Both use 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, but the Instinct MI25 runs its memory at 852 MHz (1,704 Mbps effective) versus the Pro Vega 64’s 786 MHz (1,572 Mbps effective). This yields 436.2 GB/s of bandwidth for the Instinct MI25 versus 402.4 GB/s for the Pro Vega 64, an 8.4% difference. The Instinct MI25 also has higher pixel and texture rates: 96.00 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s, compared to 86.40 GPixel/s and 345.6 GTexel/s for the Pro Vega 64. These are direct consequences of the higher clocks.

The power envelope tells the rest of the story. The Instinct MI25 has a 300 W TDP and requires two 8-pin power connectors with a suggested 700 W power supply, while the Pro Vega 64 is rated at 250 W TDP with no power connectors and is described as an integrated graphics processor (IGP). The Pro Vega 64 is also a single-slot design with display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent," whereas the Instinct MI25 is a dual-slot card with no display outputs at all, measuring 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height. These physical and power differences reflect their intended deployment environments: the Pro Vega 64 is built for Apple Mac systems with integrated cooling, while the Instinct MI25 is a standalone accelerator for server racks.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 wins in the only direct benchmark comparison, taking the Geekbench OpenCL test by 3.7%. Its average score of 72,379 also places it above the Instinct MI25’s 68,562 by 5.6% overall. The Pro Vega 64’s additional benchmark results in Metal and Vulkan show it can handle multiple API environments, which is relevant for heterogeneous workloads. Its lower power draw of 250 W and lack of external power connectors make it easier to integrate into systems with constrained power budgets, and its IGP form factor suggests it is designed for smooth integration into Apple’s Mac lineup.

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 wins on raw specification headroom. Its higher base and boost clocks, faster memory, and larger TDP envelope allow it to reach higher theoretical peak performance: 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 versus 11.06 TFLOPS, and 436.2 GB/s bandwidth versus 402.4 GB/s. For compute tasks that are limited by raw throughput rather than real-world benchmark scores, the Instinct MI25’s specifications suggest it can sustain higher sustained loads. Its dual-slot design with active cooling and 2x 8-pin power connectors is better suited for dedicated compute servers where space and power are available. The Instinct MI25 also has a predecessor listed as "FirePro Data Center," indicating its lineage in professional compute.

The practical split is clear: the Pro Vega 64 is the better choice for systems needing display output, lower power consumption, and broad API support, while the Instinct MI25 is optimized for headless compute acceleration where maximum clocks and memory bandwidth take priority. The benchmark data favors the Pro Vega 64, but the specification sheet favors the Instinct MI25 in raw numbers. This is a classic trade-off between real-world performance and theoretical peak capability.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards:

• Base Clock: 1,250 MHz (Pro Vega 64) vs 1,400 MHz (Instinct MI25)
• Boost Clock: 1,350 MHz (Pro Vega 64) vs 1,500 MHz (Instinct MI25)
• Memory Clock: 786 MHz / 1,572 Mbps effective (Pro Vega 64) vs 852 MHz / 1,704 Mbps effective (Instinct MI25)
• Memory Bandwidth: 402.4 GB/s (Pro Vega 64) vs 436.2 GB/s (Instinct MI25)
• Pixel Rate: 86.40 GPixel/s (Pro Vega 64) vs 96.00 GPixel/s (Instinct MI25)
• Texture Rate: 345.6 GTexel/s (Pro Vega 64) vs 384.0 GTexel/s (Instinct MI25)
• FP32 Performance: 11.06 TFLOPS (Pro Vega 64) vs 12.29 TFLOPS (Instinct MI25)
• FP16 Performance: 22.12 TFLOPS (Pro Vega 64) vs 24.58 TFLOPS (Instinct MI25)
• TDP: 250 W (Pro Vega 64) vs 300 W (Instinct MI25)
• Slot Width: IGP (Pro Vega 64) vs Dual-slot (Instinct MI25)
• Power Connectors: None (Pro Vega 64) vs 2x 8-pin (Instinct MI25)
• Suggested PSU: Not listed (Pro Vega 64) vs 700 W (Instinct MI25)
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent (Pro Vega 64) vs No outputs (Instinct MI25)
• Dimensions: Not listed (Pro Vega 64) vs 267 mm length, 111 mm height (Instinct MI25)
• Generation: Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) (Pro Vega 64) vs Radeon Instinct (MIx) (Instinct MI25)
• Predecessor: Not listed (Pro Vega 64) vs FirePro Data Center (Instinct MI25)
• Benchmark Scores: Geekbench Metal 71,868, OpenCL 71,094, Vulkan 74,174 (Pro Vega 64) vs Geekbench OpenCL 68,562 (Instinct MI25)
• Average Benchmark Score: 72,379 (Pro Vega 64) vs 68,562 (Instinct MI25)
• Percentile: 91st (Pro Vega 64) vs 90th (Instinct MI25)

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 runs at a 1,400 MHz base and 1,500 MHz boost, compared to the Radeon Pro Vega 64’s 1,250 MHz base and 1,350 MHz boost.

Q: How much faster is the Instinct MI25 in FP32 compute?

A: The Instinct MI25 achieves 12.29 TFLOPS FP32, which is 11.1% higher than the Pro Vega 64’s 11.06 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: Does the Pro Vega 64 have more benchmark data?

A: Yes, the Pro Vega 64 has results for Geekbench Metal (71,868), OpenCL (71,094), and Vulkan (74,174), while the Instinct MI25 only has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 68,562.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Instinct MI25 has 436.2 GB/s bandwidth versus the Pro Vega 64’s 402.4 GB/s, an 8.4% advantage for the Instinct MI25.

Q: Which card has a higher TDP?

A: The Instinct MI25 is rated at 300 W, while the Pro Vega 64 is rated at 250 W.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.