AMD Announces the Instinct MI100 GPU, CDNA Breaks 10 TFLOPS Barrier

AMD Instinct MI100
(Image credit: AMD)

AMD announced its 7nm Instinct MI100 GPU today, along with a slew of design wins from the likes of Dell, HPE, and Supermicro. The Instinct MI100 marks the first iteration of AMD's compute-focused CDNA GPU architecture. The new architecture offers up to 11.5 TFLOPS of peak FP64 throughput, making the Instinct MI100 the first GPU to break 10 TFLOPS in FP64 and marking a 3X improvement over the previous-gen MI50. It also boasts a peak throughput of 23.1 TFLOPS in FP32 workloads, beating Nvidia's beastly A100 GPU in both of those categories, though it lags with other numerical formats. 

As expected from a data center GPU, the PCIe 4.0 card is designed for AI and HPC workloads and also supports AMD's second-gen Infinity Fabric, which doubles the peer-to-peer (P2P) I/O bandwidth between cards. This fabric allows the cards to share a unified memory address space with CPUs, a key advantage for AMD as it leverages its position as the only CPU vendor that is currently shipping data center-class GPUs. The cards boast up to 340 GB/s of aggregate throughput over three Infinity Fabric links and are designed to be deployed into quad-core hives (up to two per server), with each hive supporting up to 552 GB/s of P2P I/O bandwidth.

TOPICS
Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • Kamen Rider Blade
    I wonder if they'll ever make 120 CU GPU's for consumer?
    Reply
  • thGe17
    First of all: the A100 values are a little bit mixed up.
    With Tensor Cores:
    bfloat16 or FP16 = 312 TFlops (with sparsity up to 624 TFlops)
    TF32 = 156 TFlops (with sparsity up to 312 TFlops)
    ("FP32-like/precision equivalent" matrix ops for training)
    INT8 = 624 TOPS (with sparsity up to 1248 TOPS)

    Additionally the regular base FP64 performance is 9.7 TFlops, but additionally Ampere can calculate FP64 MMA-ops via Tensor Cores in full precision and they have extended their CUDA-X libs for easy handling, therefore the resulting FP64 for a lot of (or even most?) workloads should be much higher than 9.7 TFlops FP64.

    In the end it seems that MI100 is no match for Ampere, especially not with regards to AI workloads.
    Reply
  • TCA_ChinChin
    thGe17 said:
    First of all: the A100 values are a little bit mixed up.
    With Tensor Cores:
    bfloat16 or FP16 = 312 TFlops (with sparsity up to 624 TFlops)
    TF32 = 156 TFlops (with sparsity up to 312 TFlops)
    ("FP32-like/precision equivalent" matrix ops for training)
    INT8 = 624 TOPS (with sparsity up to 1248 TOPS)

    Additionally the regular base FP64 performance is 9.7 TFlops, but additionally Ampere can calculate FP64 MMA-ops via Tensor Cores in full precision and they have extended their CUDA-X libs for easy handling, therefore the resulting FP64 for a lot of (or even most?) workloads should be much higher than 9.7 TFlops FP64.

    In the end it seems that MI100 is no match for Ampere, especially not with regards to AI workloads.
    I guess, but its still based on the usage of tensor in addition to the raw FP performance. If you're after raw FP performance, the mi100 seems to have higher numbers on paper. The amount of FP workloads that can be increased by specific use of CUDA and Nvidia's various ML libraries does seem to be quite large, but that's still something up to the individual company/researcher to determine if its useful so it's still useful to compare the "base" FP64/32 results.

    Seems like AMD's making strides, but Nvidia will still have the upper hand with their years of investment into CUDA and various ML learning workloads. It's gonna take AMD more that just having decent hardware to make up the difference.
    Reply
  • thGe17
    Yes, so it seems. Additonally nVidia announced its upgraded A100 with 80 GiB HBM2E with 2 TB/s bandwidth and additionally Infiniband 400G. Looks as if they have only waited for AMD to make the first move. ;-)

    So hopefully AMD will have more luck with its new cards than with the last Gen, which looked also promising on paper.
    Reply