Chip comparison
AMD Instinct MI300X vs Tesla HW4 (FSD Computer 2)
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.
| Field | AMD Instinct MI300X | Tesla HW4 (FSD Computer 2) |
|---|---|---|
| Process node | TSMC N5 + N6 (chiplet) | Samsung 7LPP |
| Transistors (B) | 153 | — |
| TDP | 750 W | 90 W |
| Memory | 192 GB HBM3 | 16 GB GDDR6 |
| Memory bandwidth | 5,300 GB/s | — |
| FP16 (dense) | 1,307 TFLOPS | — |
| BF16 (dense) | 1,307 TFLOPS | — |
| FP8 (dense) | 2,614 TFLOPS | — |
| INT8 (dense) | 2,614 TOPS | 300 TOPS |
| Launch price (list) | $15,000 | — |
| Form factor | OAM | Auto-board (dual-SoC) |
| Announced | 2023-12-06 | 2023-01-01 |
| Released | 2024-01-01 | 2023-02-01 |
Robots running AMD Instinct MI300X
No robots publicly running it yet.
Robots running Tesla HW4 (FSD Computer 2)
Data centers with AMD Instinct MI300X
No data centers publicly running it yet.
Data centers with Tesla HW4 (FSD Computer 2)
No data centers publicly running it yet.
Common questions
AMD Instinct MI300X vs Tesla HW4 (FSD Computer 2): which has more memory?
AMD Instinct MI300X carries more HBM (AMD Instinct MI300X: 192 GB HBM3; Tesla HW4 (FSD Computer 2): 16 GB GDDR6). Memory capacity sets the largest model that fits on one chip without partitioning; memory bandwidth sets inference throughput.
AMD Instinct MI300X vs Tesla HW4 (FSD Computer 2): which is more widely used?
AMD Instinct MI300X: 0 robots and 0 data centers publicly running it. Tesla HW4 (FSD Computer 2): 3 robots and 0 data centers. Empty here means no operator has said publicly, not zero adoption in the market.
See also: every chip comparison · AMD Instinct MI300X full page · Tesla HW4 (FSD Computer 2) full page.