AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 vs NVIDIA H20 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for both AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 and NVIDIA H20 shows no head-to-head benchmark entries, no separate benchmark scores, and no nearest rival comparisons. The database lists both accelerators with an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50 versus all GPUs, meaning neither device has accumulated measurable performance results in the current dataset. Without benchmark outcomes, the head-to-head comparison must be derived from the specification-level capabilities recorded in the database.

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 delivers a measured FP32 throughput of 47.87 TFLOPS, which is 8.33 TFLOPS higher than the NVIDIA H20's 39.54 TFLOPS. That represents a 21.1% advantage for the MI300 in single-precision floating-point work based on the raw figures. In FP16 compute, the gap expands dramatically: the MI300 records 383.0 TFLOPS with an 8:1 ratio, while the H20 records 79.07 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The MI300's FP16 output is roughly 4.8 times higher, a difference driven by both the shading unit count and the tensor core configuration.

Memory bandwidth follows a similar pattern. The MI300 has 6.55 TB/s of bandwidth across a 8192-bit bus with 128 GB of HBM3, while the H20 has 4.03 TB/s across a 6144-bit bus with 96 GB of HBM3. The MI300 leads by 2.52 TB/s, a 62.5% advantage in raw memory throughput. Texture rate also favors the MI300 at 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus 617.8 GTexel/s for the H20, a margin of roughly 2.4 times. The H20 counters in pixel rate, recording 47.52 GPixel/s against the MI300's 0 MPixel/s, since the MI300 has no ROPs in its recorded configuration.

Clock speeds favor the H20 on both fronts. The H20 runs a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 1980 MHz, whereas the MI300 runs 1000 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost. The H20's boost clock is 280 MHz higher. Memory clock also differs: the MI300's memory runs at 1600 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective, while the H20's memory runs at 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective. The higher memory clock on the MI300 partially explains its bandwidth lead, but the bus width difference is the dominant factor.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 wins in compute throughput at both FP32 and FP16 precision. Its 47.87 TFLOPS FP32 output suits workloads that rely heavily on general-purpose floating-point math, and its 383.0 TFLOPS FP16 output with an 8:1 ratio indicates a design tuned for high-throughput reduced-precision operations. The 128 GB memory capacity and 6.55 TB/s bandwidth give it a clear edge for very large models or datasets that must reside close to the compute units. The 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, built on TSMC's 5 nm process, provide the physical resource base for these results.

The NVIDIA H20 wins in clock speed and pixel throughput. Its 1830 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost clocks are substantially higher than the MI300's 1000 MHz and 1700 MHz, which can benefit latency-sensitive tasks where raw clock rate matters more than parallel width. The 47.52 GPixel/s pixel rate is achieved through 24 ROPs, a feature the MI300 lacks entirely in its recorded data. The H20 also carries 312 tensor cores explicitly listed in its specification, whereas the MI300's tensor core count is not recorded, so any tensor-specific comparison cannot be quantified from the database.

The H20's lower power target of 500 W versus 600 W for the MI300 may influence deployment decisions in power-constrained racks, though the database does not include efficiency benchmarks to confirm this. The H20 is listed as Active in production status and has a successor listed as Server Blackwell, while the MI300 has no production status recorded and no successor listed. The H20's predecessor is Server Ada; the MI300's predecessor is FirePro Data Center.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 records 47.87 TFLOPS FP32, which is 8.33 TFLOPS higher than the NVIDIA H20's 39.54 TFLOPS.

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The MI300 has 128 GB of HBM3 on a 8192-bit bus with 6.55 TB/s bandwidth. The H20 has 96 GB of HBM3 on a 6144-bit bus with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The H20 runs at 1830 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost. The MI300 runs at 1000 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost. The H20's boost clock is 280 MHz higher.

Q: Which card has tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA H20 lists 312 tensor cores. The AMD MI300 does not have a tensor core count recorded in the database.

Q: What is the transistor count for each?

A: The MI300 has 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die. The H20 has 80,000 million transistors on a 814 mm² die.

Q: What is the power draw for each?

A: The MI300 has a TDP of 600 W with 2x 8-pin power connectors and a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The H20 has a TDP of 500 W, uses an SXM Module slot, and has a suggested PSU of 900 W.

Specification Differences

The two accelerators differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The MI300 uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip with CDNA 3.0 architecture, while the H20 uses the GH100 chip with Hopper architecture. The MI300 has 14,080 shading units, 880 TMUs, and 0 ROPs; the H20 has 9,984 shading units, 312 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The MI300 has no ROPs recorded, giving it a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, while the H20 achieves 47.52 GPixel/s. Texture rate favors the MI300 at 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus 617.8 GTexel/s.

Memory configuration differs in size (128 GB versus 96 GB), bus width (8192 bit versus 6144 bit), and bandwidth (6.55 TB/s versus 4.03 TB/s). Memory clock also differs: 1600 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective on the MI300, 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective on the H20. Transistor count is 153,000 million for the MI300 and 80,000 million for the H20. Die size is 1017 mm² for the MI300 and 814 mm² for the H20. Transistor density measures 150.4M per mm² for the MI300 and 98.3M per mm² for the H20.

Power figures differ as well: the MI300 has a TDP of 600 W, while the H20 has a TDP of 500 W. The MI300 uses 2x 8-pin power connectors with a suggested PSU of 1000 W; the H20 has no power connector listed but a suggested PSU of 900 W. The MI300 dimensions are 267 mm length and 111 mm height; the H20 has no dimensions recorded but uses an SXM Module slot. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 and have no display outputs.

Release dates differ: the MI300 released on 2023-01-03, while the H20 released on 2024-01-31. The MI300 has no production status, while the H20 is listed as Active. The MI300 has no successor; the H20's successor is Server Blackwell.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is clear from the recorded data. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 uses CDNA 3.0 architecture built on TSMC's 5 nm process, with the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The NVIDIA H20 uses Hopper architecture, also on TSMC's 5 nm process, with the GH100 chip. Both share the same process node and foundry, but the MI300 packs 153,000 million transistors onto a 1017 mm² die, while the H20 packs 80,000 million onto a 814 mm² die. The resulting transistor density is 150.4M per mm² for the MI300 versus 98.3M per mm² for the H20, indicating the MI300 uses a denser design.

Shader resources differ substantially. The MI300 carries 14,080 shading units and 880 TMUs, with no ROPs listed. The H20 carries 9,984 shading units, 312 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The MI300 has no tensor core count recorded, while the H20 lists 312 tensor cores. FP16 ratios differ as well: the MI300 records 383.0 TFLOPS at an 8:1 ratio, while the H20 records 79.07 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. This ratio difference suggests the MI300 devotes more of its FP16 throughput to the 8:1 conversion path, while the H20's 2:1 ratio implies a different balance between FP32 and FP16 execution.

The H20's API support is listed as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, while the MI300 has no API entries recorded at all. Both are server-oriented accelerators with no display outputs. The H20 is part of the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation with a predecessor of Server Ada and a successor of Server Blackwell. The MI300 belongs to the Radeon Instinct (MIx) generation with a predecessor of FirePro Data Center and no successor recorded. The H20 uses an SXM Module slot, while the MI300 uses a standard PCIe 5.0 x16 interface with a 267 mm length and 111 mm height.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear split in capabilities. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 is the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads that demand high FP32 and FP16 throughput, large memory capacity, and wide memory bandwidth. Its 47.87 TFLOPS FP32, 383.0 TFLOPS FP16, 128 GB memory, and 6.55 TB/s bandwidth all exceed the H20's corresponding figures. The MI300 also has a higher texture rate at 1,496.0 GTexel/s and a denser transistor layout at 150.4M per mm².

The NVIDIA H20 is the stronger choice for workloads that benefit from higher clock speeds, pixel-rate capability, and tensor core availability. Its 1830 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost clocks exceed the MI300's clocks, and it carries 312 tensor cores explicitly in its specification. The H20 also has a lower TDP at 500 W versus 600 W, which may matter in dense server deployments, and it is the only one of the two with an Active production status and a defined successor.

Neither accelerator has recorded benchmark scores or nearest rival comparisons in the database, so these conclusions rest entirely on specification data. The MI300's raw throughput advantages in FP16 and memory bandwidth make it the data for large-scale training or inference workloads with reduced-precision requirements. The H20's higher clocks, tensor core count, and pixel rate make it the data for tasks that respond to clock speed and require ROP-based output processing. The 0 MPixel/s pixel rate on the MI300 and the 47.52 GPixel/s on the H20 mark the clearest functional divergence: the MI300 is built purely for compute, while the H20 retains some graphics pipeline capability.