AMD MI250X 128GB vs AMD Instinct MI250 128GB
The MI250X delivers 6% more FP16 throughput than the Instinct MI250 (383 vs 362 TFLOPS dense).
AMD MI250X 128GB
Full specs →AMD Instinct MI250 128GB
Full specs →Specifications
Performance (TFLOPS)
FLOPS by Precision
What actually differs
Both GPUs launched in 2021: the MI250X on CDNA 2 and the Instinct MI250 on CDNA 2.
Dense throughput for the MI250X against the Instinct MI250: FP64 48 vs 45 TFLOPS, FP32 48 vs 45 TFLOPS, FP16 383 vs 362 TFLOPS. Sparse figures, where the vendor publishes them, appear under each dense number in the performance table.
Memory is 128 GB against 128 GB, fed at 3.3 TB/s versus 3.3 TB/s. More memory per GPU means larger models fit before you have to shard across cards, which often matters more than raw TFLOPS for inference.
Power budgets are 560 W for the MI250X and 500 W for the Instinct MI250. At FP32 that works out to 0.09 against 0.09 TFLOPS per watt.
For LLM training and inference, weight the FP8 and FP16 rows and memory capacity most heavily. For scientific and HPC workloads, the FP64 row is the one to read.
Frequently asked questions
Is the MI250X faster than the Instinct MI250?
At FP16 precision the MI250X reaches 383 TFLOPS dense against 362 TFLOPS for the Instinct MI250. The performance table on this page lists every published precision for both GPUs.
Which has more memory, the MI250X or the Instinct MI250?
Both GPUs carry 128 GB of VRAM. Memory bandwidth is 3.3 TB/s for the MI250X and 3.3 TB/s for the Instinct MI250.
How much power do the MI250X and the Instinct MI250 draw?
The MI250X is rated at 560 W TDP and the Instinct MI250 at 500 W. On FP32 throughput per watt, the Instinct MI250 is the more efficient part.
Get Comparison Updates
New GPUs added weekly. Be the first to see how they compare.