AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectures of the AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X and the NVIDIA N1X 40SM?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture with the Aqua Vanjaram chip, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB20B chip.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ between these two accelerators?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus with 10.3 TB/s bandwidth, whereas the NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the FP32 compute capability of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS of FP32 compute.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM boosts to 2346 MHz, while the AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X boosts to 2100 MHz.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same process node?

A: Yes, both are manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Q: When were these products released?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X was released on 2023-12-05, and the NVIDIA N1X 40SM has a release date of 2026-05-31.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X is built on the CDNA 3.0 architecture, designed for data center compute workloads, and uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB20B chip, an integrated graphics processor (IGP) within the Blackwell IGP generation. The process node is identical at 5 nm from TSMC, but the physical implementations diverge sharply.

The MI300X has a die size of 1017 mm² and contains 153,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The N1X 40SM has a die size of 382 mm² and its transistor count is listed as unknown in the database. This difference in die area and transistor budget reflects the different roles: the MI300X is a standalone OAM module with no display outputs, while the N1X 40SM is an IGP with 1x HDMI output.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The MI300X uses HBM3 with 192 GB capacity, an 8192-bit bus, and 10.3 TB/s bandwidth. The N1X 40SM uses LPDDR5X with 128 GB capacity, a 256-bit bus, and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The MI300X memory clock is 2525 MHz with 10.1 Gbps effective, while the N1X 40SM memory runs at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective.

The MI300X has no dedicated RT cores reported and no tensor core count listed, while the N1X 40SM includes 40 RT cores and 160 tensor cores. The MI300X reports FP16 at 653.7 TFLOPS with an 8:1 ratio, whereas the N1X 40SM reports FP16 at 24.02 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The MI300X also has 1216 TMUs and 19456 shading units, while the N1X 40SM has 320 TMUs and 5120 shading units. The MI300X lists 0 ROPs and 0 MPixel/s pixel rate, while the N1X 40SM has 40 ROPs and a 93.84 GPixel/s pixel rate.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database shows no recorded head-to-head benchmark matches between these two accelerators, so the comparison must be drawn from their recorded specification-level performance metrics. The raw compute data gives a clear direction.

In FP32 throughput, the AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS, which is 3.4 times the 24.02 TFLOPS of the NVIDIA N1X 40SM. This is the largest single-metric gap in the comparison. The MI300X leads by a factor of approximately 3.4 in this scalar compute metric, indicating a substantial advantage for general compute workloads that rely on FP32 arithmetic.

Texture processing also favors the MI300X. The AMD part reaches 2,553.6 GTexel/s, while the NVIDIA part reaches 750.7 GTexel/s. The MI300X is roughly 3.4 times faster in texture rate as well, consistent with its much larger shading unit count of 19456 versus 5120.

In FP16 compute, the MI300X reports 653.7 TFLOPS under an 8:1 ratio, while the N1X 40SM reports 24.02 TFLOPS under 1:1. The raw FP16 number for the MI300X is far higher, but the ratio difference means the comparison is not directly equivalent. The MI300X clearly has the higher peak FP16 capability in absolute terms.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM does hold some wins. Its boost clock is 2346 MHz versus 2100 MHz for the MI300X, a 246 MHz advantage. Pixel throughput favors NVIDIA: the N1X 40SM produces 93.84 GPixel/s, while the MI300X produces 0 MPixel/s. The presence of 40 RT cores in the N1X 40SM versus none reported in the MI300X also gives NVIDIA the advantage in ray tracing capability, though the MI300X has no listed RT core count at all.

Memory bandwidth is not close. The MI300X delivers 10.3 TB/s compared to 273.2 GB/s for the N1X 40SM, a ratio of roughly 37.7 to 1. This bandwidth advantage is decisive for memory-bound workloads such as large model inference or training with massive parameter sets.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X | NVIDIA N1X 40SM |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | GB20B |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory Size | 192 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 10.3 TB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 19456 | 5120 |

| TMUs | 1216 | 320 |

| ROPs | 0 | 40 |

| RT Cores | null | 40 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 160 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 93.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 750.7 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 24.02 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 653.7 TFLOPS (8:1) | 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | unknown |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2026-05-31 |

The MI300X uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, as does the N1X 40SM. The MI300X has a suggested PSU of 1150 W and no power connectors listed, while the N1X 40SM has no suggested PSU data. The MI300X has no API information for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, while the N1X 40SM lists all three as N/A.

The Verdict

The data shows two accelerators built for different purposes. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X is a data center compute module with massive memory capacity, enormous bandwidth, and far higher FP32 and texture throughput. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM is an integrated graphics processor with a higher boost clock, display output, and ray tracing cores, but with a fraction of the compute throughput and memory bandwidth.

For raw compute density, the MI300X dominates. Its FP32 output of 81.72 TFLOPS versus 24.02 TFLOPS represents a 3.4 times advantage. Its texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 750.7 GTexel/s follows the same pattern. Memory bandwidth of 10.3 TB/s versus 273.2 GB/s is the clearest separation: the MI300X is built for workloads that move very large data sets, while the N1X 40SM is not.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM counters with features the MI300X lacks. It has 40 RT cores, 160 tensor cores, 40 ROPs, and a pixel rate of 93.84 GPixel/s. The MI300X reports no RT cores, no tensor core count, and 0 ROPs. The N1X 40SM also boosts to 2346 MHz, higher than the MI300X boost of 2100 MHz, and includes 1x HDMI output, which the MI300X does not have.

The release dates are separated by more than two years, with the MI300X arriving on 2023-12-05 and the N1X 40SM dated 2026-05-31. The MI300X remains the stronger compute accelerator in every scalar throughput metric recorded. The N1X 40SM is the more feature-complete graphics and ray tracing part within its IGP form factor.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X wins in FP32 compute, FP16 peak throughput, texture rate, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and memory bus width. It is the appropriate choice for workloads that demand high raw arithmetic throughput and very large memory pools, such as large-scale compute tasks where the 192 GB HBM3 pool and 10.3 TB/s bandwidth are directly relevant. Its 19456 shading units and 1216 TMUs provide the hardware resources for sustained compute density. The 750 W TDP and 1150 W suggested PSU indicate a power-hungry data center part, though no cooler or connector details are recorded.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM wins in boost clock, pixel rate, ROP count, ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and display output. It is the part to choose when the workload needs graphics output, ray tracing, or tensor operations, since the MI300X has no listed RT cores, no tensor core count, no ROPs, and no display outputs. The N1X 40SM also has a smaller die at 382 mm² versus 1017 mm², which may matter for integration density, though the MI300X packs 153,000 million transistors into that larger area.

The N1X 40SM has a higher base clock of 741 MHz versus 1000 MHz for the MI300X; note the MI300X base clock is higher, but the N1X 40SM boost clock is higher. The N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory, which is less than the 192 GB HBM3 of the MI300X, but the N1X 40SM memory is integrated as an IGP. The MI300X has no production status listed, while the N1X 40SM is marked Active.

For FP32-heavy workloads, the MI300X is the clear winner. For graphics, ray tracing, and display output, the N1X 40SM is the only one of the two with the necessary hardware. The data does not record any direct benchmark match, so the verdict rests on the specification metrics. The MI300X is the compute leader; the N1X 40SM is the feature-complete graphics IGP.