DEPLOYDatabase

Chip comparison

AWS Trainium (Trn1) vs Cambricon MLU370-X8

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.

FieldAWS Trainium (Trn1)Cambricon MLU370-X8
Process nodeTSMC N7TSMC N7
TDP500 W250 W
Memory32 GB HBM2e48 GB LPDDR5
Memory bandwidth820 GB/s
FP16 (dense)96 TFLOPS
BF16 (dense)210 TFLOPS
INT8 (dense)256 TOPS
Form factorTrn1 EC2 instancePCIe
Announced2020-12-012022-03-25
Released2022-10-01

Robots running AWS Trainium (Trn1)

No robots publicly running it yet.

Robots running Cambricon MLU370-X8

No robots publicly running it yet.

Data centers with AWS Trainium (Trn1)

No data centers publicly running it yet.

Data centers with Cambricon MLU370-X8

No data centers publicly running it yet.

Common questions

AWS Trainium (Trn1) vs Cambricon MLU370-X8: which is faster for training?

AWS Trainium (Trn1) has 2.19x the dense FP16/BF16 throughput of the other (AWS Trainium (Trn1): 210 TFLOPS; Cambricon MLU370-X8: 96 TFLOPS). Real-world training speed also depends on memory bandwidth, interconnect, and software stack: see the spec diff for those inputs.

AWS Trainium (Trn1) vs Cambricon MLU370-X8: which has more memory?

Cambricon MLU370-X8 carries more HBM (AWS Trainium (Trn1): 32 GB HBM2e; Cambricon MLU370-X8: 48 GB LPDDR5). Memory capacity sets the largest model that fits on one chip without partitioning; memory bandwidth sets inference throughput.

AWS Trainium (Trn1) vs Cambricon MLU370-X8: which is more power-efficient?

Dense FP16/BF16 TFLOPS per watt: AWS Trainium (Trn1) 0.42 (210 ÷ 500 W); Cambricon MLU370-X8 0.38 (96 ÷ 250 W). AWS Trainium (Trn1) wins at the die level; system-level efficiency also depends on cooling and interconnect.

See also: every chip comparison · AWS Trainium (Trn1) full page · Cambricon MLU370-X8 full page.