AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 vs Intel Arc A380E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 or the Intel Arc A380E. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0, and the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. The wins counter for each product is also zero, meaning there are no direct performance comparisons available from measured data.

What can be established from the recorded figures is the theoretical compute ceiling of each design. The MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput and 383.0 TFLOPS of FP16 throughput using an 8:1 ratio. The A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.192 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. The MI300's FP32 figure is approximately 11.7 times higher than the A380E's FP32 figure, while the FP16 gap is roughly 46.7 times in favor of the MI300. These are raw specification-derived rates, not measured benchmark outcomes.

Texture and pixel rates follow the same pattern. The MI300 records a texture rate of 1,496.0 GTexel/s, while the A380E records 128.0 GTexel/s, a difference of roughly 11.7 times. The pixel rate comparison is stark: the MI300 lists 0 MPixel/s because it has 0 ROPs, whereas the A380E lists 64.00 GPixel/s with 32 ROPs. For any rasterization workload requiring pixel output, the A380E has the only functional capability according to the recorded data.

Memory bandwidth is another clear divider. The MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 across an 8192-bit bus, yielding 6.55 TB/s. The A380E uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, yielding 186.0 GB/s. The MI300's bandwidth is roughly 35.2 times higher. The memory clock rates also differ: the MI300's memory runs at 1600 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective, while the A380E's memory runs at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective.

Given the absence of measured benchmark data, the database cannot confirm real-world performance deltas. The specification sheets indicate the MI300 is a data-center compute accelerator with no display outputs, while the A380E is a single-slot graphics card with four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The recorded data supports no head-to-head wins for either product.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows two products with fundamentally different purposes. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 is a 600 W accelerator with a 1000 W suggested PSU, 128 GB of HBM3, and no display outputs. The Intel Arc A380E is a 75 W single-slot card drawing power entirely from its slot, with a 250 W suggested PSU, 6 GB of GDDR6, and four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs.

For compute throughput per the specification sheet, the MI300 dominates every measured metric except pixel rate and memory clock speed. For any use case requiring display output, the A380E is the only option with that capability. The MI300's 0 MPixel/s pixel rate and 0 ROPs make it unsuitable for rasterized graphics output. The A380E's 64.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 32 ROPs confirm it can drive displays.

The production status differs: the A380E is marked end-of-life, while the MI300 has no recorded production status. The release dates place the MI300 on 2023-01-03 and the A380E on 2024-03-31. The data suggests the MI300 targets compute-heavy data center workloads where its 6.55 TB/s bandwidth and 383.0 TFLOPS FP16 matter, while the A380E targets embedded or edge graphics where its 75 W power draw and display outputs matter.

Neither product has benchmark scores, so any verdict must rest on architectural intent rather than measured performance. The MI300 is the compute leader by every relevant spec. The A380E is the only one capable of producing a picture.

Architecture Differences

The MI300 uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The A380E uses the Xe-HPG architecture on the DG2-128 chip, built on a 6 nm process at the same foundry. The process node difference is one nanometer, but the transistor counts diverge enormously: the MI300 packs 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, while the A380E packs 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The transistor density figures are 150.4M per mm² for the MI300 versus 45.9M per mm² for the A380E.

The MI300 has 14,080 shading units, 880 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. The A380E has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The MI300 has no recorded ray tracing cores or tensor cores, while the A380E has 8 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The absence of ROPs on the MI300 is a structural decision: it is not designed for rasterization output. The presence of 32 ROPs on the A380E confirms it is.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The MI300 uses HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus width, a design choice for maximum bandwidth in compute workloads. The A380E uses GDDR6 with a 96-bit bus, a conventional choice for a low-power graphics card. The MI300's 6.55 TB/s bandwidth is a data-center-class figure, while the A380E's 186.0 GB/s is a modest figure for its 75 W envelope.

The API support records reinforce the divide. The A380E lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300 lists no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan. This is consistent with a compute accelerator that does not expose graphics APIs. The MI300 is a pure compute device; the A380E is a graphics device.

The power delivery approach also differs. The MI300 requires 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W TDP. The A380E has no power connectors and a 75 W TDP, drawing power entirely from its PCIe slot. The bus interface differs as well: the MI300 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the A380E uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

Specification Differences

The two products differ across nearly every recorded specification field. Process node: 5 nm for the MI300 versus 6 nm for the A380E. Transistors: 153,000 million versus 7,200 million. Die size: 1017 mm² versus 157 mm². Transistor density: 150.4M per mm² versus 45.9M per mm².

Clock speeds: the MI300 has a 1000 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost, while the A380E has a 2000 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. The A380E runs at a single fixed clock, while the MI300 has a boost headroom of 700 MHz. The memory clocks: the MI300 runs at 1600 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective, the A380E at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective. The A380E's memory clock is higher, but the bus width difference makes the MI300's overall bandwidth vastly larger.

Memory capacity: 128 GB HBM3 versus 6 GB GDDR6. Bus width: 8192 bit versus 96 bit. Bandwidth: 6.55 TB/s versus 186.0 GB/s. Shading units: 14,080 versus 1,024. TMUs: 880 versus 64. ROPs: 0 versus 32. Ray tracing cores: none recorded versus 8. Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s. FP32: 47.87 TFLOPS versus 4.096 TFLOPS. FP16: 383.0 TFLOPS (8:1) versus 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1).

TDP: 600 W versus 75 W. Slot width: not recorded versus single-slot. Power connectors: 2x 8-pin versus none. Suggested PSU: 1000 W versus 250 W. Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs: none versus 4x DisplayPort 2.0. API support: none recorded versus DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Dimensions: the MI300 is 267 mm long and 111 mm high, the A380E is 254 mm long, 127 mm high, and 20 mm wide. The MI300 has no recorded width. Release date: 2023-01-03 for the MI300 versus 2024-03-31 for the A380E. Production status: not recorded for the MI300, end-of-life for the A380E. Predecessor: FirePro Data Center for the MI300, Xe Graphics for the A380E. Successor: none recorded for the MI300, Battlemage for the A380E.

FAQ

Q: Which product has higher FP32 compute per the recorded data?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 records 47.87 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc A380E records 4.096 TFLOPS FP32. The MI300's figure is roughly 11.7 times higher.

Q: Does the MI300 support display output?

A: No. The MI300 lists "No outputs" for display outputs and has 0 ROPs with a 0 MPixel/s pixel rate. The A380E has 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs and a 64.00 GPixel/s pixel rate.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The MI300 has 128 GB of HBM3 memory, while the A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory. The MI300's bus width is 8192 bit versus 96 bit for the A380E.

Q: Which product has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The MI300 records 6.55 TB/s bandwidth, while the A380E records 186.0 GB/s. The MI300's bandwidth is approximately 35.2 times higher.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The MI300 has a 600 W TDP and requires 2x 8-pin power connectors with a 1000 W suggested PSU. The A380E has a 75 W TDP, no power connectors, and a 250 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which product is still in production according to the database?

A: The MI300 has no recorded production status. The A380E is marked as end-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 wins every compute-oriented specification in the database. Its FP32 throughput of 47.87 TFLOPS, FP16 throughput of 383.0 TFLOPS, texture rate of 1,496.0 GTexel/s, and memory bandwidth of 6.55 TB/s place it in a different class from the A380E. The 128 GB HBM3 memory capacity and 8192-bit bus width make it suited for large-scale compute workloads where data residency and bandwidth are critical. The 600 W TDP and 1000 W suggested PSU indicate a data-center installation context.

The Intel Arc A380E wins every display and rasterization-oriented specification. Its 64.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, 32 ROPs, and 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs give it the only functional graphics output path in this comparison. The 8 ray tracing cores provide hardware support for ray-traced workloads, a feature the MI300 does not record. The single-slot form factor, 75 W TDP, and no power connectors make it suitable for low-power embedded systems. Its 2000 MHz base and boost clocks are higher than the MI300's 1000 MHz base, though the boost clocks are closer at 1700 MHz versus 2000 MHz.

The A380E also wins on software API exposure. It lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI300 lists none. The A380E's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is narrower than the MI300's PCIe 5.0 x16, but it does not require the same host bandwidth for its lower-throughput design.

The production status favors the MI300 in the sense that the A380E is end-of-life, but the MI300's status is simply unrecorded. The A380E has a successor listed as Battlemage, while the MI300 has no successor. The release dates show the MI300 came first, on 2023-01-03, followed by the A380E on 2024-03-31.

For any workload that ends in a display, the A380E is the only choice according to the data. For any workload that requires maximum compute throughput, memory bandwidth, or memory capacity, the MI300 is the only choice. The two products do not compete in the same segment; the specifications make that clear without any measured benchmarks to complicate the picture.