AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER Comparison

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER occupy different eras of GPU design, yet the recorded benchmark data offers a clear quantitative comparison for compute workloads. The single shared test metric, Geekbench OpenCL, shows a decisive performance gap, but the architectural context reveals why these two cards are built for fundamentally different purposes.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER scores 219,065 points, while the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 scores 68,562 points. This represents a delta of -68.7% for the AMD part, meaning the RTX 4080 SUPER delivers roughly three times the raw compute throughput in this specific workload. The margin is substantial and consistent with the generational leap between the two products.

In the broader context of the database, the MI25 sits near the 90th percentile among all GPUs, while the RTX 4080 SUPER sits at the 86th percentile. This apparent contradiction is explained by the different test suites each card has been subjected to. The MI25 has only one recorded benchmark result, the OpenCL test, while the RTX 4080 SUPER has ten recorded results across multiple test suites including DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, Vulkan, 2D, and compute workloads. The RTX 4080 SUPER's average benchmark score across all tests is 54,209, which places it in the 86th percentile. The MI25's average score equals its single OpenCL result of 68,562, which places it in the 90th percentile.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card provides additional context. The MI25 is within 2% of several comparable cards: it trails the Intel Arc A770 by 0.4%, the NVIDIA CMP 90HX by 0.6%, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 by 1.9%, and the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 by 2%. This clustering suggests the MI25's compute capability is well-matched to its professional contemporaries from the same period. The RTX 4080 SUPER, meanwhile, is nearly identical to the standard RTX 4080, with a delta of only -0.1%. It trails the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X by 1.1%, the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB by 2.7%, and the AMD Radeon 8060S by 2.8%.

The head-to-head result is unambiguous. The RTX 4080 SUPER wins the only shared benchmark, and it does so by a wide margin. However, the benchmark suite available for each card differs significantly, which limits direct comparability beyond the OpenCL test. The MI25 has no recorded gaming or DirectX benchmarks, while the RTX 4080 SUPER has extensive coverage across DirectX versions. This reflects their intended deployment scenarios rather than a deficiency in either product.

Architecture Differences

The MI25 is built on AMD's Vega 10 chip using the GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The chip contains 12,500 million transistors on a die size of 495 mm², yielding a transistor density of 25.3 million per square millimeter. The RTX 4080 SUPER uses NVIDIA's AD103 chip with the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. This chip contains 45,900 million transistors on a smaller die of 379 mm², achieving a much higher density of 121.1 million transistors per square millimeter.

The process node difference is stark: 14 nm versus 5 nm. This generational gap explains much of the performance disparity. The RTX 4080 SUPER packs nearly four times the transistors into a smaller physical footprint, enabled by the advanced manufacturing process. Clock speeds reflect this too. The MI25 runs at a base clock of 1400 MHz and a boost clock of 1500 MHz. The RTX 4080 SUPER runs at 2295 MHz base and 2550 MHz boost, a substantial increase that compounds the architectural advantages.

Memory subsystems differ fundamentally. The MI25 uses 16 GB of HBM2 with a 2048-bit bus, delivering 436.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4080 SUPER uses 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 736.3 GB/s. Despite having a much narrower bus, the RTX 4080 SUPER achieves significantly higher bandwidth due to the faster memory technology. The memory clock for the MI25 is 852 MHz, translating to 1704 Mbps effective, while the RTX 4080 SUPER runs at 1438 MHz, translating to 23 Gbps effective.

Compute resources show a similar pattern. The MI25 has 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10,240 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 112 render output units. The RTX 4080 SUPER also includes 80 ray tracing cores and 320 tensor cores, features that are entirely absent from the MI25. The MI25 has no dedicated ray tracing or tensor hardware, reflecting its data center compute focus rather than gaming or AI acceleration.

Pixel and texture rates follow the hardware counts. The MI25 achieves 96.00 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s. The RTX 4080 SUPER achieves 285.6 GPixel/s and 816.0 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance shows the largest gap: the MI25 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.58 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. The RTX 4080 SUPER delivers 52.22 TFLOPS FP32 and 52.22 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio. The RTX 4080 SUPER's FP16 throughput matches its FP32 throughput, whereas the MI25 halves its FP16 rate.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4080 SUPER wins decisively in every measurable compute category. Its OpenCL score is over three times higher. Its FP32 and FP16 throughput are both over four times higher. Its memory bandwidth is nearly 70% higher. Its pixel and texture rates are roughly three times higher. For any workload that relies on raw shader compute, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the superior part.

The MI25 does hold advantages in specific areas, though these are not reflected in benchmark wins. Its HBM2 memory with a 2048-bit bus provides lower latency characteristics compared to GDDR6X, which can benefit certain data center workloads. The card is also physically more compact at 267 mm length and 111 mm height, compared to the RTX 4080 SUPER's 310 mm length, 140 mm height, and 61 mm width. The MI25 is dual-slot, while the RTX 4080 SUPER is triple-slot. For dense server installations, the MI25's smaller footprint and lower power draw of 300 W versus 320 W make it easier to deploy in multi-GPU configurations.

The MI25 was released on June 26, 2017, and is now end-of-life. The RTX 4080 SUPER was released on January 30, 2024, and is also end-of-life. The RTX 4080 SUPER's predecessor is the GeForce 30 series, and its successor is the GeForce 50 series. The MI25's predecessor is the FirePro Data Center line, and it has no recorded successor. The RTX 4080 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, while the MI25 supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the RTX 4080 SUPER supports Vulkan 1.4 while the MI25 supports Vulkan 1.3.

For gaming and consumer workloads, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the clear choice. Its ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and extensive DirectX support make it suitable for modern games and creative applications. The MI25 has no display outputs, making it unsuitable for any interactive graphics work. It is a pure compute accelerator. For compute-heavy data center tasks that do not require ray tracing or tensor operations, the MI25's lower power draw and smaller physical size could be preferable, but its compute performance is far behind.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification. The MI25 uses a 14 nm process, while the RTX 4080 SUPER uses a 5 nm process. Transistor counts are 12,500 million versus 45,900 million. Die sizes are 495 mm² versus 379 mm². Transistor densities are 25.3 million per mm² versus 121.1 million per mm². Base clocks are 1400 MHz versus 2295 MHz. Boost clocks are 1500 MHz versus 2550 MHz.

Memory types differ: HBM2 versus GDDR6X. Bus widths are 2048-bit versus 256-bit. Bandwidth is 436.2 GB/s versus 736.3 GB/s. Shading units are 4096 versus 10,240. Texture mapping units are 256 versus 320. Render output units are 64 versus 112. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 80 ray tracing cores and 320 tensor cores; the MI25 has none.

Pixel rates are 96.00 GPixel/s versus 285.6 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 384.0 GTexel/s versus 816.0 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 12.29 TFLOPS versus 52.22 TFLOPS. FP16 performance is 24.58 TFLOPS versus 52.22 TFLOPS. Power draw is 300 W versus 320 W. The MI25 uses dual-slot width with 2x 8-pin power connectors, while the RTX 4080 SUPER uses triple-slot width with 1x 16-pin power connector. Both have a suggested PSU of 700 W.

The MI25 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RTX 4080 SUPER uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs: the MI25 has none, while the RTX 4080 SUPER has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The MI25 measures 267 mm by 111 mm, while the RTX 4080 SUPER measures 310 mm by 140 mm by 61 mm. The RTX 4080 SUPER has a launch MSRP of 999 USD; the MI25 has no recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher compute performance in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER scores 219,065 points in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 scores 68,562 points, a delta of -68.7%.

Q: Do both cards have the same amount of memory?

A: Yes, both have 16 GB, but the MI25 uses HBM2 with a 2048-bit bus and 436.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the RTX 4080 SUPER uses GDDR6X with a 256-bit bus and 736.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: Only the RTX 4080 SUPER has ray tracing cores, specifically 80 of them. The MI25 has no ray tracing hardware.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The MI25 has 25.3 million transistors per mm², while the RTX 4080 SUPER has 121.1 million per mm², reflecting the 14 nm versus 5 nm process difference.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life. The MI25 was released on June 26, 2017, and the RTX 4080 SUPER was released on January 30, 2024.

Q: Which card has display outputs?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the MI25 has no display outputs, making it unsuitable for direct display connection.