AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 vs NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile and AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 represent two very different approaches to professional computing, separated by nearly four years of architectural evolution. The data shows a clear overall winner in the RTX A3000 Mobile, which holds a 2.3% average benchmark lead over the MI25, but the two cards are built for entirely different environments—one is a 70 W mobile solution, the other a 300 W dual-slot accelerator with no display outputs. Understanding where each card excels requires looking beyond the raw scores to their architectural priorities and physical realities.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A3000 Mobile wins the only head-to-head benchmark available, posting a 79091 score in Geekbench OpenCL against the MI25’s 68562, a 15.4% advantage. This win is significant because it comes in a compute-oriented workload that should theoretically favor the older, higher-power AMD card. The A3000 Mobile also shows broader API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, making it the more versatile choice for modern graphics and compute tasks.

The MI25’s wins are not in raw benchmark scores but in capacity and raw throughput metrics. It offers 16 GB of HBM2 memory versus the A3000 Mobile’s 6 GB of GDDR6, and its 436.2 GB/s memory bandwidth is 65% higher. Its texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s more than doubles the A3000 Mobile’s 157.4 GTexel/s, and its FP16 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS is 2.4 times higher. For workloads that are memory-bound or rely on packed math, the MI25 holds a clear edge. The MI25 also wins on pixel rate, 96.00 GPixel/s versus 78.72 GPixel/s, though this matters little for a card with no display outputs.

The practical split is straightforward: the A3000 Mobile is a mobile workstation GPU that can handle both graphics and compute with modern API support, while the MI25 is a compute-only accelerator with large memory capacity and raw throughput advantages that no longer show up as wins in modern OpenCL benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The RTX A3000 Mobile uses the GA104 chip built on Samsung’s 8 nm process, packing 17,400 million transistors into a 392 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 44.4 million per mm², a figure that reflects the advanced manufacturing node. The MI25 uses the Vega 10 chip on GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm process, with 12,500 million transistors spread across a larger 495 mm² die, resulting in just 25.3 million transistors per mm².

The A3000 Mobile is built on the Ampere architecture, which brings dedicated RT cores and tensor cores—32 and 128 respectively. These hardware units enable ray tracing and AI acceleration, features entirely absent from the MI25, which has none. The MI25 uses the older GCN 5.0 architecture, which relies on a different compute model without dedicated acceleration for these workloads.

Memory architectures differ fundamentally. The A3000 Mobile uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, achieving 264.0 GB/s. The MI25 uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, achieving 436.2 GB/s. The MI25’s memory bus is over ten times wider, which explains its bandwidth advantage despite much lower memory clocks—852 MHz versus 1375 MHz.

FP16 performance reveals another architectural split. The A3000 Mobile delivers FP16 at 10.08 TFLOPS, a 1:1 ratio with its FP32 throughput. The MI25 delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP16, a 2:1 ratio, indicating a more traditional packed-math approach. The MI25 also has twice the TMUs—256 versus 128—contributing to its texture rate advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single head-to-head benchmark result is decisive but not comprehensive. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A3000 Mobile scores 79091 against the MI25’s 68562, a 15.4% victory. This is the only direct comparison available, and it shows the newer architecture overcoming the older card’s advantages in memory bandwidth and raw FP32 throughput.

Context from nearest rivals helps interpret this result. The A3000 Mobile’s average benchmark score of 70140 places it 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 and 1.9% ahead of the Intel Arc A770. It trails the AMD Radeon RX 6650M by 3%, a gaming-oriented mobile GPU. The MI25’s average score of 68562 puts it 0.4% behind the Intel Arc A770, 1.2% behind the Radeon Pro WX 8200, and 1.8% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro P6000.

The 15.4% delta in the head-to-head is larger than the 2.3% delta between their average scores, suggesting the OpenCL workload specifically favors the Ampere architecture. This could stem from the A3000 Mobile’s newer instruction set, better driver optimization, or the efficiency of its 8 nm process allowing higher sustained clocks relative to its power envelope.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has better memory bandwidth for large datasets?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 has 436.2 GB/s of bandwidth from its 2048-bit HBM2 interface, versus 264.0 GB/s on the RTX A3000 Mobile’s 192-bit GDDR6 bus.

Q: Can the MI25 be used for graphics output?

A: No. The MI25 has no display outputs, while the RTX A3000 Mobile’s outputs are described as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it relies on the host laptop’s display connections.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing hardware?

A: Only the RTX A3000 Mobile. It has 32 dedicated RT cores, while the MI25 has no RT core count listed.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The RTX A3000 Mobile is rated at 70 W and requires no power connectors, while the MI25 is rated at 300 W and requires two 8-pin connectors and a 700 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has better API compatibility for modern games?

A: The RTX A3000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI25 supports only DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The RTX A3000 Mobile packs 44.4 million transistors per mm² on an 8 nm process, versus 25.3 million per mm² on the MI25’s 14 nm process.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile | AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 5.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 17,400 million | 12,500 million |

| Die Size | 392 mm² | 495 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 44.4M / mm² | 25.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 600 MHz | 1400 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1230 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1375 MHz (11 Gbps effective) | 852 MHz (1704 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 2048 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 264.0 GB/s | 436.2 GB/s |

| TMUs | 128 | 256 |

| ROPs | 64 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 32 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 128 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 78.72 GPixel/s | 96.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 157.4 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 10.08 TFLOPS | 12.29 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 10.08 TFLOPS (1:1) | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 70 W | 300 W |

| Slot Width | Not specified | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None | 700 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2021-04-11 | 2017-06-26 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Turing-M | FirePro Data Center |

| Successor | Ada-MW | None |

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the RTX A3000 Mobile outperforms the MI25 by 2.3% on average and by 15.4% in the direct OpenCL comparison. For any workload captured by Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA card is the better choice, delivering higher performance while consuming 230 W less power and requiring no external power connectors.

The MI25 retains relevance only in specific scenarios. Its 16 GB of HBM2 memory and 436.2 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for datasets that exceed the A3000 Mobile’s 6 GB capacity. Its FP16 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS is more than double the A3000 Mobile’s, and its 384.0 GTexel/s texture rate is unmatched. For compute tasks that are memory-capacity-bound or leverage packed FP16 math, the MI25 has a reason to exist.

However, the MI25’s disadvantages are severe. It has no display outputs, no RT or tensor cores, older API support, and a 300 W power draw requiring a 700 W PSU. It is a compute-only accelerator from 2017, while the A3000 Mobile is a 2021 mobile workstation part with modern features.

The verdict depends on the use case. If you need a flexible GPU that can handle graphics, compute, ray tracing, and AI workloads in a mobile form factor, the RTX A3000 Mobile wins decisively. If you have a specific compute workload that requires more than 6 GB of memory or relies on FP16 packed math, and you have the power budget and physical space for a dual-slot 300 W card, the MI25 remains a viable option. For most users, the data points to the A3000 Mobile as the superior all-around choice.