AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 vs NVIDIA PG506-232 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains a single direct comparison between the NVIDIA PG506-232 and the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60, using the Geekbench OpenCL workload. The results are decisive. The NVIDIA PG506-232 scores 225,124 points, while the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 scores 92,488 points. This gives the NVIDIA part a 143.4% advantage in this specific test, meaning it more than doubles the AMD card's output in raw compute throughput as measured by OpenCL.

Looking at the broader context, the PG506-232 sits at the 99th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA L20 at 251,147 points, which is 10.4% ahead, and the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D at 219,827 points, which trails by 2.4%. The MI60, by contrast, holds the 93rd percentile, with its closest competitor being the AMD Radeon Pro VII at 97,131 points, which is 4.8% faster. The MI60 also edges out the NVIDIA RTX A4500 by just 0.9% (92,488 versus 91,671), and the RTX A4500 Mobile by 1.5% (92,488 versus 91,134). These close margins around the MI60's score indicate that it competes in a much lower performance tier than the PG506-232.

The OpenCL test is the only head-to-head benchmark available in the database, and the NVIDIA card wins it outright. There are no recorded tests where the MI60 pulls ahead. The 143.4% delta is substantial, and it aligns with the raw specification differences that will be examined in later sections. The PG506-232's score is also higher than several other data-center cards in its neighborhood, such as the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB at 207,124 points, which it beats by 8.7%, and the NVIDIA RTX 6000D at 195,964 points, which it beats by 14.9%. This places the PG506-232 firmly in the upper echelon of the database, while the MI60 sits in a mid-to-upper tier but well below the PG506-232.

The MI60 does have a Vulkan score recorded (92,444), but no corresponding Vulkan result exists for the PG506-232 in the database, so a direct comparison on that API cannot be made. The OpenCL result is therefore the only quantitative basis for a head-to-head verdict. Given the magnitude of the delta, the PG506-232 is the clear winner in compute performance as measured here.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA PG506-232 scores 225,124 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 scores 92,488. The PG506-232 leads by 143.4%.

Q: How does the PG506-232 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The PG506-232 is 2.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D (219,827), 8.7% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB (207,124), and 14.9% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 6000D (195,964). It trails the NVIDIA L20 (251,147) by 10.4%.

Q: How does the MI60 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The MI60 is 0.9% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A4500 (91,671) and 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (91,134). It trails the AMD Radeon Pro VII (97,131) by 4.8% and the AMD Radeon RX 7900M (97,487) by 5.2%.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The PG506-232 has 24 GB of HBM2 memory on a 3072-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 933.1 GB/s. The MI60 has 32 GB of HBM2 memory on a 4096-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 1.02 TB/s.

Q: What is the transistor count and die size for each GPU?

A: The PG506-232 uses the GA100 chip with 54,200 million transistors on an 826 mm² die. The MI60 uses the Vega 20 chip with 13,230 million transistors on a 331 mm² die.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 throughput?

A: The MI60 has a higher FP32 rating at 14.75 TFLOPS, compared to the PG506-232's 10.32 TFLOPS. However, this does not translate to a higher OpenCL score for the MI60 in the recorded data.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators come from different architectural lineages. The NVIDIA PG506-232 is built on the Ampere architecture, specifically the GA100 chip, and belongs to the Server Ampere generation. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 uses the GCN 5.1 architecture with the Vega 20 chip, part of the Radeon Instinct generation. Both are fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC, but the chip designs diverge significantly.

The PG506-232 integrates 54,200 million transistors on an 826 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.6 million per mm². The MI60 packs 13,230 million transistors into a 331 mm² die, giving a density of 40.0 million per mm². This means the NVIDIA chip is far larger and more densely packed, which is consistent with its higher compute throughput in the OpenCL benchmark.

The PG506-232 features 224 tensor cores, which are absent on the MI60. The NVIDIA card also has 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 96 render output units. The MI60 offers 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. While the MI60 has more shaders and TMUs, the PG506-232 has more ROPs and dedicated tensor hardware.

Clock behavior also differs. The PG506-232 has a base clock of 930 MHz and a boost clock of 1440 MHz. The MI60 starts at 1200 MHz and boosts to 1800 MHz. The AMD card runs at higher clocks, but the NVIDIA card's larger die and tensor cores appear to give it the edge in the recorded OpenCL workload.

Memory architecture differs as well. The PG506-232 uses 24 GB of HBM2 on a 3072-bit bus, delivering 933.1 GB/s. The MI60 uses 32 GB of HBM2 on a wider 4096-bit bus, delivering 1.02 TB/s. The MI60 has more memory and higher bandwidth, yet the PG506-232 still outperforms it in the benchmark.

The PG506-232 has no display outputs, while the MI60 includes a single mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. The MI60 also supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, whereas the PG506-232 lists no API support in the database. This suggests the NVIDIA card is purely compute-focused, while the AMD card retains some graphics capability.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification except for a few shared traits. Both are dual-slot cards, both measure 267 mm in length (10.5 inches), and both use a PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface. Both are also end-of-life products.

The most obvious difference is memory capacity and bandwidth. The PG506-232 has 24 GB of HBM2 with 933.1 GB/s bandwidth, while the MI60 has 32 GB of HBM2 with 1.02 TB/s. The bus widths differ as well: 3072 bits for NVIDIA versus 4096 bits for AMD.

Power requirements are not identical. The PG506-232 has a TDP of 165 W and requires a single 8-pin EPS power connector, with a suggested PSU of 450 W. The MI60 has a TDP of 300 W and needs one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector, with a suggested PSU of 700 W.

Compute specifications show a split. The MI60 has higher FP32 (14.75 TFLOPS versus 10.32 TFLOPS) and much higher FP16 (29.49 TFLOPS versus 10.32 TFLOPS). The PG506-232's FP16 is listed as 1:1 with FP32, while the MI60's FP16 is 2:1. The PG506-232 has a higher pixel rate (138.2 GPixel/s versus 115.2 GPixel/s), but the MI60 has a higher texture rate (460.8 GTexel/s versus 322.6 GTexel/s).

The PG506-232 includes 224 tensor cores, which the MI60 lacks entirely. The NVIDIA card also has more ROPs (96 versus 64), while the MI60 has more shaders (4096 versus 3584) and TMUs (256 versus 224).

Physical dimensions are nearly the same, with the PG506-232 at 112 mm height and the MI60 at 111 mm height. Release dates differ, with the PG506-232 launching in April 2021 and the MI60 in November 2018. The PG506-232 lists a predecessor of Tesla Turing and a successor of Server Ada, while the MI60 lists a predecessor of FirePro Data Center and no successor.

Where Each One Wins

The PG506-232 wins decisively in the only recorded head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test. Its score of 225,124 places it in the 99th percentile of all GPUs, and it sits above several notable data-center accelerators in the database, including the A100 PCIe 80 GB and RTX 6000D. The tensor cores and higher ROP count likely contribute to its strong compute showing, despite a lower FP32 rating than the MI60.

The MI60, with its 93rd percentile ranking, is competitive within its own tier. It edges out the RTX A4500 and RTX A4500 Mobile by narrow margins, and it offers higher FP32 and FP16 throughput on paper. Its larger memory pool (32 GB) and higher bandwidth (1.02 TB/s) could be advantageous for workloads that are memory-bound or require large datasets, even though the OpenCL result does not reflect such an advantage.

For applications that rely on raw compute throughput as measured by OpenCL, the PG506-232 is the stronger choice. For tasks that prioritize FP32 or FP16 math, or that need more than 24 GB of memory, the MI60 has theoretical advantages. The MI60 also supports Vulkan and DirectX 12, which the PG506-232 does not, making it more versatile for graphics-inclusive workloads.

In a purely data-center compute context, the PG506-232's benchmark dominance and higher percentile position make it the recommended part. The MI60 remains a viable option for memory-heavy or FP16-heavy tasks, but the recorded data shows a clear performance gap favoring the NVIDIA accelerator.