AMD Radeon Instinct MI308X vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct benchmark entries for either the AMD Radeon Instinct MI308X or the NVIDIA B200 SXM6. Both cards show an empty benchmark array, an average benchmark score of zero, and a percentile ranking of 50 among all GPUs. Consequently, there are no measured wins, losses, or performance deltas to report between these two accelerators in the head-to-head comparison. The winsA and winsB counters are both zero, indicating a complete absence of comparative test data.

Without benchmark results, the analysis must rely on the architectural specifications and theoretical peak rates recorded in the database. The MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS, placing the AMD part approximately 17.9% higher in single-precision floating-point throughput. In FP16, the gap reverses dramatically: the MI308X records 653.7 TFLOPS using an 8:1 ratio, whereas the B200 SXM6 records 69.34 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The AMD accelerator shows 9.4 times the FP16 throughput of the NVIDIA part, though the difference stems from the ratio convention each architecture uses.

Memory bandwidth also favors the MI308X, which lists 10.3 TB/s against the B200 SXM6's 8.19 TB/s, a 25.8% advantage. Texture fill rate favors AMD as well, with 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 1,083.4 GTexel/s, making the MI308X approximately 2.4 times faster in that metric. The NVIDIA part counters with pixel rate, recording 43.92 GPixel/s while the AMD card lists 0 MPixel/s, reflecting the different rendering output configurations.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators share a 5 nm TSMC process node but diverge sharply in chip design. The MI308X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on CDNA 3.0 architecture, part of the Radeon Instinct (MIx) generation. The B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip on Blackwell architecture, belonging to the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation. Both are manufactured by TSMC, but the transistor counts differ substantially: the MI308X contains 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, while the B200 SXM6 packs 208,000 million transistors onto a 1628 mm² die. Transistor density runs 150.4M per mm² for the AMD chip versus 127.8M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Memory configurations diverge in capacity and type. The MI308X carries 192 GB of HBM3 across an 8192-bit bus, while the B200 SXM6 carries 180 GB of HBM3e across the same 8192-bit bus width. Despite the smaller capacity, the newer HBM3e standard on the NVIDIA card does not translate to higher bandwidth in the recorded data; the AMD card's 10.3 TB/s exceeds the NVIDIA card's 8.19 TB/s. The B200 SXM6 uses 8 Gbps effective memory speed, while the MI308X uses 10.1 Gbps effective.

Compute unit counts show a mixed picture. The MI308X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 texture mapping units, with zero ROPs recorded. The B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, 592 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs. The NVIDIA card additionally lists 592 tensor cores, a feature category left null for the AMD card. Clock behavior also differs: the MI308X runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost, while the B200 SXM6 runs at a 120 MHz base and 1830 MHz boost, a notably lower base clock that reflects different power management characteristics.

Power figures separate the two clearly. The MI308X has a TDP of 750 W and a suggested PSU rating of 1150 W, while the B200 SXM6 has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The NVIDIA card consumes 33.3% more power under the TDP metric. Both use module form factors, OAM for AMD and SXM for NVIDIA, with no display outputs on either card. The bus interface differs as well: the MI308X uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the B200 SXM6 uses PCIe 6.0 x16.

Release timing places the AMD card earlier, with a release date of December 5, 2023, against the NVIDIA card's October 31, 2024. The NVIDIA part carries a production status of Active, while the AMD part has no production status recorded. Predecessors and successors also differ: the MI308X lists FirePro Data Center as its predecessor and no successor, while the B200 SXM6 lists Server Hopper as predecessor and Server Rubin as successor.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI308X records 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32, which is 12.38 TFLOPS higher than the NVIDIA B200 SXM6's 69.34 TFLOPS, a 17.9% advantage.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The MI308X lists 10.3 TB/s of bandwidth from 192 GB of HBM3, while the B200 SXM6 lists 8.19 TB/s from 180 GB of HBM3e. The AMD card leads by 2.11 TB/s.

Q: What is the FP16 performance difference?

A: The MI308X records 653.7 TFLOPS at an 8:1 ratio, while the B200 SXM6 records 69.34 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The AMD card shows roughly 9.4 times higher FP16 throughput as recorded.

Q: Does the NVIDIA card have tensor cores?

A: Yes, the B200 SXM6 lists 592 tensor cores. The MI308X database entry leaves tensor cores as null, so no comparable figure exists.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The MI308X has a 750 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The B200 SXM6 has a 1000 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1400 W.

Q: Which card uses a newer memory standard?

A: The B200 SXM6 uses HBM3e, while the MI308X uses HBM3. However, the MI308X still records higher bandwidth in the database.

The Verdict

The recorded data does not support a benchmark-based verdict, since neither card has any test scores in the database. What the specification data shows is a clear split in design priorities. The MI308X leads in FP32 throughput, FP16 throughput, memory bandwidth, texture fill rate, and shading unit count. The B200 SXM6 leads in transistor count, die size, tensor core presence, ROP count, pixel rate, and PCIe generation. The NVIDIA card carries a higher TDP by 250 W, suggesting it draws more power for its design.

For deployments where raw FP32 or FP16 compute density and memory bandwidth dominate, the MI308X presents the stronger recorded figures. For workloads that require tensor core acceleration or pixel processing, the B200 SXM6 offers capabilities the AMD card does not list. The 12 GB memory capacity difference favors AMD, as does the lower power envelope. The NVIDIA card's active production status and later release date indicate a current product lifecycle, while the AMD card's status remains unrecorded.

The launch MSRP for the B200 SXM6 is 34,999 USD. The MI308X has no launch MSRP in the database.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Instinct MI308X | NVIDIA B200 SXM6 |

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

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | GB100 |

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Blackwell |

| Generation | Radeon Instinct (MIx) | Server Blackwell (Bxx) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | 208,000 million |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 1628 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | 127.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 120 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 1830 MHz |

| Memory Size | 192 GB | 180 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3 | HBM3e |

| Memory Bus | 8192 bit | 8192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 10.3 TB/s | 8.19 TB/s |

| Memory Speed | 10.1 Gbps effective | 8 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 19456 | 18944 |

| TMUs | 1216 | 592 |

| ROPs | 0 | 24 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 592 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 43.92 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 1,083.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 69.34 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 653.7 TFLOPS (8:1) | 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 1000 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | SXM Module |

| Suggested PSU | 1150 W | 1400 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 6.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | No outputs |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2024-10-31 |

| Production Status | null | Active |

| Predecessor | FirePro Data Center | Server Hopper |

| Successor | null | Server Rubin |

Where Each One Wins

The MI308X wins on compute density. Its 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 figure exceeds the B200 SXM6 by roughly 18%, and its 653.7 TFLOPS FP16 throughput at an 8:1 ratio dwarfs the NVIDIA card's 69.34 TFLOPS at 1:1. The AMD card also wins on memory bandwidth with 10.3 TB/s versus 8.19 TB/s, on texture rate with 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 1,083.4 GTexel/s, and on shading units with 19,456 versus 18,944. It achieves these figures with a lower 750 W TDP compared to 1000 W.

The B200 SXM6 wins on architectural features. Its 592 tensor cores provide a dedicated acceleration path absent from the MI308X entry. The 24 ROPs and 43.92 GPixel/s pixel rate give it rendering output capability where the AMD card records zero. The PCIe 6.0 x16 interface doubles the bus generation compared to the AMD card's PCIe 5.0 x16. The NVIDIA chip carries 55,000 million more transistors across a 611 mm² larger die, and its HBM3e memory uses a newer standard.

Workload placement follows these splits. Applications that scale with FP32 or FP16 throughput and memory bandwidth, such as large-matrix operations or data movement, align with the MI308X's recorded strengths. Applications that rely on tensor core operations or pixel output align with the B200 SXM6. The 12 GB extra memory on the AMD card supports larger resident datasets, while the NVIDIA card's active production status indicates current availability. Neither card offers display outputs, so both target compute environments exclusively.