DEPLOYDatabase

Chip comparison

AMD Instinct MI250X vs AMD Instinct MI325X

Side-by-side specs

Straight from each vendor's datasheet. Winner in bold: higher throughput, memory, or transistor count; lower power draw or price. Sparse (2:4) throughput roughly doubles the FP8/INT8 numbers shown.

FieldAMD Instinct MI250XAMD Instinct MI325X
Process nodeTSMC N6TSMC N5 + N6 (chiplet)
TDP560 W1000 W
Memory128 GB HBM2e256 GB HBM3e
Memory bandwidth3,200 GB/s6,000 GB/s
FP16 (dense)383 TFLOPS1,307 TFLOPS
BF16 (dense)383 TFLOPS1,307 TFLOPS
FP8 (dense)—2,614 TFLOPS
INT8 (dense)383 TOPS2,614 TOPS
Form factorOAMOAM
Announced2021-11-082024-10-10
Released2022-06-012025-01-01

Robots running AMD Instinct MI250X

No robots publicly running it yet.

Robots running AMD Instinct MI325X

No robots publicly running it yet.

Data centers with AMD Instinct MI250X

No data centers publicly running it yet.

Data centers with AMD Instinct MI325X

No data centers publicly running it yet.

Common questions

AMD Instinct MI250X vs AMD Instinct MI325X: which is faster for training?

AMD Instinct MI325X has 6.83x the dense FP16/BF16 throughput of the other (AMD Instinct MI250X: 383 TFLOPS; AMD Instinct MI325X: 2,614 TFLOPS). Real-world training speed also depends on memory bandwidth, interconnect, and software stack: see the spec diff for those inputs.

AMD Instinct MI250X vs AMD Instinct MI325X: which has more memory?

AMD Instinct MI325X carries more HBM (AMD Instinct MI250X: 128 GB HBM2e; AMD Instinct MI325X: 256 GB HBM3e). Memory capacity sets the largest model that fits on one chip without partitioning; memory bandwidth sets inference throughput.

AMD Instinct MI250X vs AMD Instinct MI325X: which is more power-efficient?

Dense FP16/BF16 TFLOPS per watt: AMD Instinct MI250X 0.68 (383 ÷ 560 W); AMD Instinct MI325X 2.61 (2,614 ÷ 1000 W). AMD Instinct MI325X wins at the die level; system-level efficiency also depends on cooling and interconnect.

See also: every chip comparison · AMD Instinct MI250X full page · AMD Instinct MI325X full page.