DEPLOYDatabase

Chip comparison

AMD Instinct MI350 series vs Google TPU v5p

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 MI350 seriesGoogle TPU v5p
Process nodeTSMC N3 (chiplet)—
TDP1000 W300 W
Memory288 GB HBM3e95 GB HBM2e
Memory bandwidth8,000 GB/s2,765 GB/s
FP16 (dense)2,300 TFLOPS—
BF16 (dense)2,300 TFLOPS459 TFLOPS
FP8 (dense)4,600 TFLOPS—
INT8 (dense)4,600 TOPS918 TOPS
Form factorOAMOAM (per-chip in v5p pod)
Announced2025-06-122023-12-06
Released2025-10-012024-01-01

Robots running AMD Instinct MI350 series

No robots publicly running it yet.

Robots running Google TPU v5p

No robots publicly running it yet.

Data centers with AMD Instinct MI350 series

Data centers with Google TPU v5p

Common questions

AMD Instinct MI350 series vs Google TPU v5p: which is faster for training?

AMD Instinct MI350 series has 10.02x the dense FP16/BF16 throughput of the other (AMD Instinct MI350 series: 4,600 TFLOPS; Google TPU v5p: 459 TFLOPS). Real-world training speed also depends on memory bandwidth, interconnect, and software stack: see the spec diff for those inputs.

AMD Instinct MI350 series vs Google TPU v5p: which has more memory?

AMD Instinct MI350 series carries more HBM (AMD Instinct MI350 series: 288 GB HBM3e; Google TPU v5p: 95 GB HBM2e). Memory capacity sets the largest model that fits on one chip without partitioning; memory bandwidth sets inference throughput.

AMD Instinct MI350 series vs Google TPU v5p: which is more power-efficient?

Dense FP16/BF16 TFLOPS per watt: AMD Instinct MI350 series 4.60 (4,600 ÷ 1000 W); Google TPU v5p 1.53 (459 ÷ 300 W). AMD Instinct MI350 series wins at the die level; system-level efficiency also depends on cooling and interconnect.

See also: every chip comparison · AMD Instinct MI350 series full page · Google TPU v5p full page.