AMD Radeon Instinct MI300A vs Intel Arc G3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon Instinct MI300A and the Intel Arc G3. Neither product has recorded benchmark scores, average scores, or rival comparison data. The MI300A and Arc G3 each hold a 50th percentile position against all GPUs in the database, and both have an average benchmark score of zero. With zero wins recorded for each side, the quantitative comparison must rely entirely on the architectural and specification data available in the database.

The raw computational throughput figures show a massive divide. The MI300A delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Arc G3 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS. That places the MI300A at approximately 13.3 times the raw FP32 throughput of the Arc G3. In FP16, the gap widens further: the MI300A reaches 653.7 TFLOPS (8:1 ratio), while the Arc G3 manages 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The MI300A's FP16 figure is roughly 53 times higher than the Arc G3's, though the different FP16 ratios (8:1 versus 2:1) mean these figures are not directly comparable in terms of real-world compute efficiency.

Texture and pixel processing also favor the MI300A overwhelmingly. The MI300A posts a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s against the Arc G3's 96.00 GTexel/s, a factor of about 26.6. The MI300A's pixel rate is listed as 0 MPixel/s, which reflects its lack of traditional ROPs (0 ROPs). The Arc G3, by contrast, has 20 ROPs and achieves 48.00 GPixel/s. This is the one metric where the Arc G3 reports a non-zero value and the MI300A reports zero.

Memory bandwidth is another decisive separator. The MI300A uses 192 GB of HBM3 memory across an 8192-bit bus, yielding 10.3 TB/s of bandwidth. The Arc G3 uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth figure, meaning no fixed bandwidth number exists in the database. The MI300A's memory clock is listed at 2525 MHz with 10.1 Gbps effective data rate. The Arc G3's memory clock is listed simply as "System Shared."

Clock speeds tell a different story. The Arc G3 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The MI300A has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The Arc G3's boost clock exceeds the MI300A's by 300 MHz, but the MI300A's base clock is 700 MHz higher. The Arc G3's higher boost clock does not compensate for its far lower shader count.

Shader resources are heavily lopsided. The MI300A contains 19,456 shading units and 1,216 TMUs. The Arc G3 contains 1,280 shading units and 40 TMUs. The MI300A has roughly 15.2 times the shading units and 30.4 times the TMUs of the Arc G3. The Arc G3 does include 10 ray tracing cores, while the MI300A lists no ray tracing cores in the database. Neither product lists tensor cores.

The Verdict

The data points to two entirely different product categories. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300A is a data center accelerator with 750 W TDP, an OAM Module slot form factor, no display outputs, and no power connectors listed. The Intel Arc G3 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 25 W TDP, portable device dependent display outputs, and system shared memory. The MI300A requires a suggested power supply of 1150 W, while the Arc G3 lists no suggested PSU.

For compute workloads that rely on FP32 or FP16 throughput, the MI300A is the clear choice based on the recorded specifications. Its 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 and 653.7 TFLOPS FP16 figures dwarf the Arc G3's 6.144 TFLOPS and 12.29 TFLOPS. The MI300A's 10.3 TB/s memory bandwidth and 192 GB HBM3 capacity support large-scale data processing that the Arc G3's system shared memory cannot match.

For graphics rendering tasks that require rasterization and ray tracing, the Arc G3 has the only relevant features in the database. It has 20 ROPs, a 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 10 ray tracing cores. The MI300A reports 0 ROPs and 0 MPixel/s pixel rate, with no ray tracing cores listed. The Arc G3 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300A lists no API support in the database.

The production status also differs. The Arc G3 is marked as "Active" in the database. The MI300A has no production status listed. The release dates show the MI300A released on 2023-12-05, while the Arc G3 has a release date of 2026-05-31. The MI300A's predecessor is listed as FirePro Data Center, while the Arc G3 has no predecessor listed.

Neither product shows a launch MSRP in the database, so no pricing information is available.

Architecture Differences

The MI300A uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on CDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Arc G3 uses the Panther Lake chip built on Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel. The process node difference is significant: Intel's 3 nm node versus TSMC's 5 nm node. The MI300A contains 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The Arc G3's transistor count, die size, and transistor density are all listed as unknown in the database.

The MI300A is classified under the Radeon Instinct (MIx) generation, while the Arc G3 falls under Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake). The MI300A uses PCIe 5.0 x16 as its bus interface, while the Arc G3 uses an IGP bus interface, meaning it is integrated into a processor package. The MI300A is an OAM Module, a modular accelerator form factor, while the Arc G3 is an IGP with no separate slot width.

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The MI300A has dedicated 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus, achieving 10.3 TB/s bandwidth. The Arc G3 uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it draws from the host system's main memory. Its memory type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as system dependent. This architectural distinction defines the use cases: the MI300A is designed for memory-intensive data center workloads, while the Arc G3 relies on the host platform's memory resources.

The power requirements reflect these architectural choices. The MI300A draws 750 W TDP and requires a 1150 W suggested power supply. The Arc G3 draws only 25 W TDP and lists no suggested power supply. The MI300A has no power connectors listed, which is consistent with an OAM Module that receives power through its socket. The Arc G3 also has no power connectors listed, consistent with an integrated GPU.

Display capabilities differ entirely. The MI300A has no display outputs. The Arc G3's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning they depend on the host device. The MI300A is not designed for graphics output at all.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300A delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, compared to the Intel Arc G3's 6.144 TFLOPS. The MI300A's FP32 throughput is approximately 13.3 times higher.

Q: Does the Intel Arc G3 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Arc G3 lists 10 ray tracing cores in the database. The MI300A does not list any ray tracing cores.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The MI300A uses 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus with 10.3 TB/s bandwidth. The Arc G3 uses system shared memory, with memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The MI300A has a 750 W TDP and requires a suggested power supply of 1150 W. The Arc G3 has a 25 W TDP and lists no suggested power supply.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc G3 has a boost clock of 2400 MHz, while the AMD MI300A has a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The Arc G3's boost clock is 300 MHz higher.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc G3 is listed as "Active" in the database. The AMD MI300A has no production status listed.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300A wins decisively in raw compute throughput. Its 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 and 653.7 TFLOPS FP16 figures place it in a completely different performance class than the Arc G3. The 10.3 TB/s memory bandwidth and 192 GB HBM3 capacity make it suitable for data center workloads that require massive memory pools and high bandwidth. The 750 W TDP and 1150 W suggested PSU indicate a product designed for server power delivery, not constrained mobile environments. The MI300A's 19,456 shading units and 1,216 TMUs provide the parallel resources needed for large-scale compute tasks. Its 5 nm TSMC process with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die represents a high-cost, high-performance design.

The Intel Arc G3 wins in graphics-specific features and efficiency. Its 20 ROPs and 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate give it actual rasterization capability, which the MI300A lacks entirely (0 ROPs, 0 MPixel/s). The 10 ray tracing cores provide hardware ray tracing support that the MI300A does not list. The Arc G3 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI300A lists no API support. The 25 W TDP makes it suitable for portable devices and integrated graphics use cases. The 3 nm Intel process node and 2400 MHz boost clock show a focus on clock speed and power efficiency rather than brute compute throughput. The Arc G3's display outputs are portable device dependent, meaning it is designed to drive displays in mobile systems.

The MI300A's advantage in FP16 is particularly notable. Its 653.7 TFLOPS (8:1 ratio) versus the Arc G3's 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) reflects different design priorities. The MI300A's 8:1 FP16 ratio indicates a compute-focused architecture that packs more FP16 operations per cycle. The Arc G3's 2:1 ratio is more balanced but produces far lower absolute throughput.

The clock speed comparison shows the Arc G3's higher boost clock (2400 MHz versus 2100 MHz) does not translate into competitive compute performance because of the massive shader count difference. The MI300A's 19,456 shading units at 2100 MHz produce far more work per clock cycle than the Arc G3's 1,280 shading units at 2400 MHz.

The release dates place these products in different eras. The MI300A released on 2023-12-05, while the Arc G3 has a release date of 2026-05-31. The MI300A's predecessor is FirePro Data Center, indicating a lineage of professional compute products. The Arc G3 has no predecessor listed, suggesting it is a new product line entry.

Neither product has benchmark scores in the database, and neither has nearest rival data. The percentile rankings are identical at 50, and both average benchmark scores are zero. The comparison therefore rests entirely on the specification data, which shows two products optimized for different ends of the computing spectrum. The MI300A is a dedicated accelerator for high-throughput compute, and the Arc G3 is an integrated graphics solution for portable devices.