AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 vs Intel Arc A310E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 versus the Intel Arc A310E. Both cards have zero recorded benchmark scores, an average benchmark score of zero, and identical percentile rankings at the 50th percentile against all GPUs. The wins tally is zero for each side. Without measured performance data, any direct comparison of frame rates, compute throughput, or workload completion times cannot be substantiated from the available records.

The absence of benchmark results does not imply parity. The two products occupy entirely different positions in the hardware landscape, and the specification data confirms that they are not intended to compete in the same tasks. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 delivers a FP32 compute rate of 47.87 TFLOPS, while the Intel Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS. That is a 15.6x gap in single-precision floating-point throughput based on the listed figures. In FP16, the MI300 reaches 383.0 TFLOPS (8:1 ratio), whereas the A310E reaches 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), a 62.3x difference. These are not close scores; they are orders of magnitude apart.

Memory bandwidth shows a similarly decisive split. The MI300 provides 6.55 TB/s of bandwidth across an 8192-bit HBM3 interface with 128 GB of capacity. The A310E provides 124.0 GB/s across a 64-bit GDDR6 interface with 4 GB of capacity. The MI300 offers roughly 52.8x the memory bandwidth and 32x the memory capacity. Texture rate favors the MI300 at 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus 64.00 GTexel/s for the A310E, a 23.4x difference. Pixel rate is the sole category where the Intel part registers a non-zero figure: the A310E outputs 32.00 GPixel/s, while the MI300 lists 0 MPixel/s, reflecting that the AMD accelerator has no display outputs and is not designed for rasterized graphics presentation.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two GPUs should never be cross-shopped. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 is a data center accelerator with a 600 W TDP, a 1000 W suggested PSU, PCIe 5.0 x16 connectivity, and no display outputs. Its specifications point toward massive parallel compute, large model memory residency, and sustained high-throughput workloads. The Intel Arc A310E is a 75 W single-slot card with PCIe 4.0 x8, four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, indicating a client-side graphics and lightweight compute role.

The MI300 uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die. The A310E uses the Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The MI300 carries 14,080 shading units and 880 texture mapping units; the A310E carries 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores. The MI300 lists zero ROPs and zero ray tracing cores. For workloads that require ray tracing or display output, only the A310E has the relevant hardware. For workloads that require extreme FP32, FP16, memory bandwidth, or memory capacity, the MI300 is the only candidate in this pairing.

The production status fields differ as well. The A310E is marked end-of-life with a successor listed as Battlemage. The MI300 has no production status recorded and no successor listed. The A310E launched on 2024-03-31, while the MI300 launched on 2023-01-03. Neither card has a launch MSRP field populated, so no pricing statement can be made.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 wins every measured compute and memory category in the database. FP32 performance, FP16 performance, texture rate, memory bandwidth, memory capacity, memory bus width, shading unit count, TMU count, transistor count, and die size all favor the MI300 by wide margins. The MI300 also uses a newer process node at 5 nm versus 6 nm, and it achieves a transistor density of 150.4M per mm² compared to 45.9M per mm² for the A310E. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provides double the lane width and a newer generation than the A310E's PCIe 4.0 x8.

The Intel Arc A310E wins the categories that the MI300 cannot contest. It is the only card with display outputs, offering 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0. It is the only card with ray tracing cores, listing 6 RT cores. It has 16 ROPs and a pixel rate of 32.00 GPixel/s, while the MI300 has no ROPs and no pixel throughput. The A310E has a higher base clock and boost clock, both at 2000 MHz, versus 1000 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost for the MI300. The A310E draws 75 W versus 600 W, requires a 250 W suggested PSU versus 1000 W, needs no external power connectors versus 2x 8-pin on the MI300, and comes in a single-slot form factor with dimensions of 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width. The MI300 measures 267 mm by 111 mm with no width recorded. The A310E also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; the MI300 lists no API support data at all.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS FP32, compared to 3.072 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc A310E.

Q: Which GPU has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The MI300 has 128 GB of HBM3 memory with 6.55 TB/s bandwidth on an 8192-bit bus. The A310E has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth on a 64-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU supports display output?

A: Only the Intel Arc A310E supports display output, with 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 lists no outputs.

Q: Which GPU has ray tracing cores?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has 6 ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 lists no ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The MI300 has a 600 W TDP, a 1000 W suggested PSU, and 2x 8-pin power connectors. The A310E has a 75 W TDP, a 250 W suggested PSU, and no external power connectors.

Q: What is the process node and transistor count for each?

A: The MI300 uses a 5 nm process with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die. The A310E uses a 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 is built on the CDNA 3.0 architecture and uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The Intel Arc A310E is built on the Xe-HPG architecture and uses the DG2-128 chip. The MI300 belongs to the Radeon Instinct (MIx) generation, while the A310E belongs to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. The MI300's predecessor is the FirePro Data Center lineup, with no successor recorded. The A310E's predecessor is Xe Graphics, and its successor is Battlemage.

The MI300 is fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process, with 153,000 million transistors, a 1017 mm² die size, and a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The A310E is also fabricated by TSMC, but on a 6 nm process, with 7,200 million transistors, a 157 mm² die size, and a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The MI300 packs 14,080 shading units and 880 TMUs, but has no ROPs, no ray tracing cores, and no tensor cores listed. The A310E has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores, with no tensor cores listed. The MI300's pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s, while the A310E's is 32.00 GPixel/s.

The MI300 supports FP16 at an 8:1 ratio relative to FP32, reaching 383.0 TFLOPS. The A310E supports FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, reaching 6.144 TFLOPS. The MI300 uses HBM3 memory, while the A310E uses GDDR6. The MI300 has no display outputs, while the A310E has 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0. The MI300 has no recorded API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, whereas the A310E lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds differ notably. The MI300 runs at a 1000 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost, with memory at 1600 MHz or 6.4 Gbps effective. The A310E runs at 2000 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost, with memory at 1937 MHz or 15.5 Gbps effective.

Memory configuration differs completely. The MI300 has 128 GB HBM3, an 8192-bit bus, and 6.55 TB/s bandwidth. The A310E has 4 GB GDDR6, a 64-bit bus, and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources differ. The MI300 has 14,080 shading units, 880 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. The A310E has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs.

Power and physical design differ. The MI300 has a 600 W TDP, 2x 8-pin connectors, a 1000 W suggested PSU, and no slot width recorded. The A310E has a 75 W TDP, no power connectors, a 250 W suggested PSU, and a single-slot form factor.

Bus interface and dimensions differ. The MI300 uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and measures 267 mm by 111 mm. The A310E uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and measures 168 mm by 69 mm by 20 mm.

Release timing and status differ. The MI300 launched on 2023-01-03 with no production status or successor recorded. The A310E launched on 2024-03-31, is marked end-of-life, and lists Battlemage as its successor. Neither product has a populated launch MSRP field in the database.