GPU Comparison
AMD Radeon Instinct MI25
TITAN X Pascal
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The only direct benchmark comparison available between the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal and the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are close. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 scores 68,562 points, while the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal trails with 66,696 points. That gives AMD a 2.7% victory in this single head-to-head contest, with the deltaPct reading -2.7 from NVIDIA’s perspective.
While the TITAN X Pascal loses that specific matchup, its average benchmark score tells a slightly different story. The TITAN X Pascal posts an average of 72,098 across its tested workloads, which is notably higher than the MI25’s 68,562 average. This discrepancy suggests the TITAN X Pascal performs better in Vulkan-based tasks, its Geekbench Vulkan score of 77,499 is substantially higher than its OpenCL result, indicating the card has untapped potential in that API that the MI25 cannot match, since the MI25 only has an OpenCL result listed.
Looking at the nearest rivals for each card, the TITAN X Pascal sits in a competitive cluster. It is 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 (72,379 average score) and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6650M (71,768). The gap to the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE is 1.8%, with that card scoring 70,829. The TITAN X Pascal also trails the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition by 1.7%, which scores 73,370. These deltas are all within a narrow band, meaning the TITAN X Pascal is neither a clear leader nor a laggard in its peer group.
The MI25’s rival set is similarly tight. It sits 0.4% behind the Intel Arc A770 (68,809) and 0.6% behind the NVIDIA CMP 90HX (69,000). The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 is 1.9% ahead at 69,870, and the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 leads by 2% at 69,986. The MI25’s position here is consistent: it is a mid-pack performer in its immediate neighborhood, with no rival more than 2% away.
In terms of percentile ranking, the TITAN X Pascal sits at the 91st percentile among all GPUs, while the MI25 is at the 90th. That one-point difference aligns with the average score gap and reinforces the notion that the TITAN X Pascal has a slight edge in overall standing, even though it loses the OpenCL head-to-head.
Where Each One Wins
The AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 takes the sole direct benchmark win, and that victory comes in OpenCL compute workloads. The data shows the MI25 scoring 68,562 versus the TITAN X Pascal’s 66,696 in Geekbench OpenCL, a 2.7% margin. If the workload is heavily OpenCL-bound, the MI25 is the safer pick based on this result.
However, the TITAN X Pascal has a broader advantage in mixed or Vulkan-heavy scenarios. Its Vulkan score of 77,499 is far above its OpenCL result, and no comparable Vulkan figure exists for the MI25 to counter it. The TITAN X Pascal also benefits from a higher average benchmark score of 72,098, which captures performance across multiple tests rather than a single API. For users who value consistent overall performance over a single API-specific result, the TITAN X Pascal is the stronger candidate.
The TITAN X Pascal also wins on the percentile front. Sitting at the 91st percentile versus the MI25’s 90th means the NVIDIA card ranks slightly higher relative to the entire GPU landscape. That difference is small, but it reflects the TITAN X Pascal’s better average showing.
For rasterization and graphics-oriented tasks, the TITAN X Pascal’s higher pixel rate of 147.0 GPixel/s versus the MI25’s 96.00 GPixel/s suggests a clear advantage in fill-rate-limited scenarios. The MI25 counters with a higher texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s versus the TITAN X Pascal’s 342.9 GTexel/s, so texture-heavy workloads may favor AMD.
Architecture Differences
The two cards come from different foundries and process nodes. NVIDIA uses TSMC’s 16 nm process for the GP102 chip, while AMD employs GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm node for Vega 10. Transistor counts are close: the TITAN X Pascal packs 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die, while the MI25 has 12,500 million on a 495 mm² die. Transistor density is nearly identical, 25.1M per mm² for NVIDIA versus 25.3M per mm² for AMD.
The memory subsystems diverge sharply. The TITAN X Pascal uses 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus, yielding 480.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The MI25 uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, but its bandwidth is lower at 436.2 GB/s. The TITAN X Pascal’s memory clock is 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective), while the MI25’s is 852 MHz (1704 Mbps effective). Despite the MI25’s wider bus, the TITAN X Pascal’s higher memory clock gives it the bandwidth advantage.
Compute resources differ in configuration. The TITAN X Pascal has 3,584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. The MI25 has more shading units at 4,096, more TMUs at 256, but fewer ROPs at 64. This translates to a higher pixel rate for NVIDIA (147.0 GPixel/s) but a higher texture rate for AMD (384.0 GTexel/s).
Floating-point performance is another point of divergence. The TITAN X Pascal delivers 10.97 TFLOPS of FP32 and a meager 171.5 GFLOPS of FP16, with a 1:64 FP16 ratio. The MI25 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS of FP32 and 24.58 TFLOPS of FP16, with a 2:1 ratio. That is a massive difference in half-precision compute, making the MI25 far better suited for FP16 workloads.
Clock speeds are similar. The TITAN X Pascal has a base clock of 1417 MHz and a boost of 1531 MHz. The MI25 has a base of 1400 MHz and a boost of 1500 MHz. Power consumption favors NVIDIA, with a 250 W TDP versus the MI25’s 300 W. Power connectors reflect this: the TITAN X Pascal uses one 6-pin and one 8-pin, while the MI25 needs two 8-pins.
Both cards are dual-slot and use PCIe 3.0 x16. The TITAN X Pascal has display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), while the MI25 has none, it is a compute-only accelerator. API support is nearly identical, with DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6 on both, but the TITAN X Pascal supports Vulkan 1.4 while the MI25 is limited to Vulkan 1.3.
FAQ
Q: Which card has higher FP32 performance?
A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 has the higher FP32 throughput at 12.29 TFLOPS, compared to the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal’s 10.97 TFLOPS.
Q: How do memory bandwidth figures compare?
A: The TITAN X Pascal leads with 480.4 GB/s from 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus, while the MI25 provides 436.2 GB/s from 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus.
Q: Is the MI25 suitable for display output?
A: No, the MI25 has no display outputs, making it a compute-only accelerator, whereas the TITAN X Pascal includes DVI, HDMI 2.0, and three DisplayPort 1.4a connections.
Q: What are the power requirements for each card?
A: The TITAN X Pascal has a 250 W TDP and a suggested 600 W PSU, while the MI25 has a 300 W TDP and a suggested 700 W PSU.
Q: Which card supports Vulkan 1.4?
A: Only the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal supports Vulkan 1.4; the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 is capped at Vulkan 1.3.
Q: How does the MI25’s FP16 performance compare?
A: The MI25 delivers 24.58 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, while the TITAN X Pascal offers just 171.5 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio, making the MI25 overwhelmingly superior for half-precision compute.
The Verdict
The data presents a clear split between these two cards. If the workload is FP16-heavy or OpenCL-bound, the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 is the better choice. Its 24.58 TFLOPS of FP16 is over 140 times the TITAN X Pascal’s 171.5 GFLOPS, and it wins the direct OpenCL benchmark by 2.7%. The MI25 also offers 16 GB of HBM2 memory versus 12 GB of GDDR5X, which matters for large datasets.
For general-purpose graphics or Vulkan workloads, the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal is the stronger pick. Its Vulkan score of 77,499 dwarfs its OpenCL result and suggests superior API efficiency, while its average benchmark score of 72,098 beats the MI25’s 68,562 by a meaningful margin. The TITAN X Pascal also delivers higher pixel rate (147.0 GPixel/s versus 96.00 GPixel/s), higher memory bandwidth (480.4 GB/s versus 436.2 GB/s), lower TDP (250 W versus 300 W), and includes display outputs, a feature the MI25 lacks entirely.
Users who need a compute accelerator for FP16 or OpenCL tasks should favor the MI25. Users who want a versatile card that can handle graphics, Vulkan, and mixed workloads, while drawing less power and offering display connectivity, should pick the TITAN X Pascal. The MI25’s single benchmark win is real but narrow, and the TITAN X Pascal’s broader benchmark average and higher percentile ranking make it the more balanced product overall.