Consumercarts

Consumercarts is reader-supported. Learn more

AMD Instinct MI210 vs AMD Instinct MI300X: Comparison

AMD Instinct MI210 and AMD Instinct MI300X separate most on tdp: AMD Instinct MI210 at 300 W, AMD Instinct MI300X at 750 W, 150% in favor of AMD Instinct MI210. Card Length splits them by another 110%, this time favoring AMD Instinct MI300X. They match on 4 other specifications, including gpu brand, tier and ray tracing support.

Pick the AMD Instinct MI210 if that matters to you: 2.5x the TDP (300 W vs 750 W), so it needs a smaller power supply and runs cooler. Pick the AMD Instinct MI300X if that matters to you: 3x the VRAM (192 GB vs 64 GB), which matters at 1440p and 4K with high texture settings.

Which is better, AMD Instinct MI210 or AMD Instinct MI300X?

On paper, AMD Instinct MI210 has the edge on tdp, at 300 W vs AMD Instinct MI300X at 750 W.

What is the main difference between AMD Instinct MI210 and AMD Instinct MI300X?

The AMD Instinct MI210 and AMD Instinct MI300X are built for different jobs. The AMD Instinct MI210 has 2.5x the TDP (300 W vs 750 W), so it needs a smaller power supply and runs cooler. The AMD Instinct MI300X has 3x the VRAM (192 GB vs 64 GB), which matters at 1440p and 4K with high texture settings.

Specs and benchmarks

  • GPU Brand

    AMD Instinct MI210
    AMD
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    AMD
  • Series

    AMD Instinct MI210
    Instinct MI200
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    Instinct MI300
  • Board Partner

    AMD Instinct MI210
    AMD Reference (PCIe dual-slot card, data center/OEM only)
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    AMD Reference (OAM module, data center/OEM only)
  • VRAM

    AMD Instinct MI210
    64 GB-67%
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    192 GBBest
  • Tier

    AMD Instinct MI210
    Datacenter / AI Accelerator
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    Datacenter / AI Accelerator
  • Memory Type

    AMD Instinct MI210
    HBM2E
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    HBM3Best
  • Boost Clock

    AMD Instinct MI210
    1700 MHz-19%
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    2100 MHzBest
  • Ray Tracing Support

    AMD Instinct MI210
    No
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    No
  • TDP

    AMD Instinct MI210
    300 WBest
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    750 W-150%
  • Architecture

    AMD Instinct MI210
    CDNA 2 (single Graphics Compute Die)
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    CDNA 3
  • Process Node

    AMD Instinct MI210
    TSMC 6nm
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    TSMC 5nm compute dies + 6nm I/O dies (chiplet)
  • Card Length

    AMD Instinct MI210
    267 mm-110%
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    127 mmBest
  • Slot Width

    AMD Instinct MI210
    2
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    N/A (OAM form factor)
  • Compute Blocks

    AMD Instinct MI210
    104
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    304
  • Memory Bus Width

    AMD Instinct MI210
    4096 bit-50%
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    8192 bitBest
  • Memory Bandwidth

    AMD Instinct MI210
    1600 GB/s-70%
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    5300 GB/sBest
  • PCIe Generation

    AMD Instinct MI210
    PCIe 4.0 x16
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    PCIe 5.0 x16 host link + Infinity Fabric GPU-to-GPU
  • Launch Date

    AMD Instinct MI210
    2022-03
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    2023-12
  • Display Outputs

    AMD Instinct MI210
    N/A - compute-only, no display output
    AMD Instinct MI300X
    N/A - compute-only, no display output

    Which one should you pick?

    Choose AMD Instinct MI210 if you want the lower TDP (300 W vs 750 W).

    Choose AMD Instinct MI300X if you want the higher VRAM (192 GB vs 64 GB), the higher boost clock (2100 MHz vs 1700 MHz) and the lower card length (127 mm vs 267 mm).

    Verdict

    AMD Instinct MI210

    7.3 / 10 Expert Rating

    A practical, PCIe-slot-friendly way to get CDNA 2 compute into a standard server, useful for smaller HPC and AI deployments, but clearly the entry point of its generation next to the dual-die MI250X and now well behind the MI300 series.

    AMD Instinct MI300X

    8.8 / 10 Expert Rating

    A legitimate memory-capacity leader against the H100 generation, and AMD's strongest foothold yet in the AI training and inference market, held back mainly by CUDA ecosystem lock-in rather than the silicon itself.

    More comparisons in Graphics Cards