AMD Radeon 760M vs NVIDIA H20 NVL16 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon 760M and NVIDIA H20 NVL16 serve entirely different segments, and the database records no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between them. The Radeon 760M is an integrated graphics processor for compact, low-power systems, while the H20 NVL16 is a server accelerator with no display outputs. The data shows the H20 NVL16 holds a 50th percentile rank across all GPUs, whereas the Radeon 760M sits at the 35th percentile. The Radeon 760M delivers a recorded average benchmark score of 6019, placing it within 0.5% of the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 and within 0.4% of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server. The H20 NVL16 has no recorded benchmarks in the database, making direct performance comparison impossible. The Radeon 760M is the only option for systems requiring integrated graphics, while the H20 NVL16 targets server workloads with its 96 GB HBM3 memory and 4.03 TB/s bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The Radeon 760M uses the Phoenix chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The H20 NVL16 uses the GH100 chip based on Hopper architecture, also fabricated at TSMC but on a 5 nm process. The Radeon 760M belongs to the Navi III IGP generation, while the H20 NVL16 belongs to the Server Hopper generation.

Transistor counts differ substantially. The Radeon 760M contains 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 142.6 million per mm². The H20 NVL16 contains 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, with a density of 98.3 million per mm². The H20 NVL16 has a much larger physical implementation, but the Radeon 760M achieves higher packing density on its smaller die.

Clock behavior diverges significantly. The Radeon 760M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2599 MHz, a ratio of more than 3:1 between base and boost. The H20 NVL16 has a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 1980 MHz, a much narrower range. The H20 NVL16 operates at higher absolute base and boost frequencies, but the Radeon 760M has a wider dynamic range.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The Radeon 760M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth marked as system dependent. The H20 NVL16 uses 96 GB of HBM3 memory on a 6144-bit bus, delivering 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth. The H20 NVL16 also has a dedicated memory clock of 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective data rate, while the Radeon 760M has no dedicated memory clock.

Compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The Radeon 760M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 raster output units, and 8 ray tracing cores. The H20 NVL16 has 9984 shading units, 312 texture mapping units, 24 raster output units, and 312 tensor cores. The H20 NVL16 has no recorded ray tracing core count, while the Radeon 760M has no tensor cores.

Feature support also differs. The Radeon 760M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The H20 NVL16 has no API support recorded for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan. The Radeon 760M connects via PCIe 4.0 x8 and has motherboard-dependent display outputs. The H20 NVL16 connects via PCIe 5.0 x16 and has no display outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 79.07 TFLOPS of FP16 performance, compared to the AMD Radeon 760M's 5.323 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16. The H20 NVL16 leads by roughly 7.4 times in FP32 and about 14.9 times in FP16.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The Radeon 760M uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. The H20 NVL16 has 96 GB of HBM3 memory on a 6144-bit bus with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth. The H20 NVL16 also has a dedicated memory clock of 1313 MHz, whereas the Radeon 760M has no dedicated memory clock.

Q: Which GPU has better rasterization rates?

A: The H20 NVL16 has a pixel rate of 47.52 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 617.8 GTexel/s. The Radeon 760M has a pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s. The H20 NVL16 leads in pixel rate by about 14% and in texture rate by more than 7 times.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The Radeon 760M has a TDP of 15 W and uses no power connectors. The H20 NVL16 has a TDP of 400 W and a suggested PSU of 800 W. The H20 NVL16 consumes 26.7 times the power of the Radeon 760M.

Q: Which GPU supports modern graphics APIs?

A: Only the Radeon 760M supports graphics APIs, with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The H20 NVL16 has no API support recorded for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan.

Q: How does the Radeon 760M rank against its nearest rivals?

A: The Radeon 760M has an average benchmark score of 6019. It sits 0.3% above the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6001) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6000), 0.4% above the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server (5996), and 0.5% below the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (6049).

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 760M | NVIDIA H20 NVL16 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Phoenix | GH100 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Hopper |

| Generation | Navi III IGP (Phoenix) | Server Hopper (Hxx) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 25,390 million | 80,000 million |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 814 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 142.6M / mm² | 98.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 1830 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2599 MHz | 1980 MHz |

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 1313 MHz 5.3 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 96 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | HBM3 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 6144 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 4.03 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 9984 |

| TMUs | 32 | 312 |

| ROPs | 16 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 8 | null |

| Tensor Cores | null | 312 |

| Pixel Rate | 41.58 GPixel/s | 47.52 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 83.17 GTexel/s | 617.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.323 TFLOPS | 39.54 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1) | 79.07 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 400 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | SXM Module |

| Power Connectors | None | null |

| Suggested PSU | null | 800 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Motherboard Dependent | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2024-01-30 | 2025-09-01 |

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | Server Ada |

| Successor | null | Server Blackwell |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Radeon 760M and the NVIDIA H20 NVL16. The recorded wins for each GPU stand at 0. Consequently, the analysis relies on the individual benchmark data available for the Radeon 760M and the architectural metrics recorded for both parts.

The Radeon 760M has a full set of recorded benchmarks across multiple test suites. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 400. In Geekbench, it achieves 20255 in OpenCL and 30336 in Vulkan. Passmark results show 19 in DirectX 10, 52 in DirectX 11, 25 in DirectX 12, 65 in DirectX 9, 890 in G2D, 5310 in G3D, and 2840 in GPU Compute. Its average benchmark score is 6019, and its percentile rank across all GPUs is 35.

The H20 NVL16 has no recorded benchmark scores in any test suite. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its percentile rank is 50. Without benchmark data, the only quantitative comparison available comes from the specification table.

In FP32 compute, the H20 NVL16 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS versus 5.323 TFLOPS for the Radeon 760M, a 7.4 times advantage. In FP16, the H20 NVL16 delivers 79.07 TFLOPS versus 5.323 TFLOPS for the Radeon 760M, a 14.9 times advantage. The H20 NVL16 also leads in texture rate with 617.8 GTexel/s versus 83.17 GTexel/s, a 7.4 times advantage. Its pixel rate of 47.52 GPixel/s exceeds the Radeon 760M's 41.58 GPixel/s by about 14%.

The Radeon 760M leads in several areas. Its transistor density of 142.6M per mm² exceeds the H20 NVL16's 98.3M per mm² by about 45%. Its boost clock of 2599 MHz is higher than the H20 NVL16's 1980 MHz boost clock. Its TDP of 15 W is dramatically lower than the H20 NVL16's 400 W.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 760M wins in scenarios defined by low power and integrated operation. Its 15 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it suitable for compact systems where a separate GPU cannot be installed. Its status as an IGP with motherboard-dependent display outputs indicates it serves as the graphics solution for a host system. Its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 means it can run modern graphics workloads, and its 8 ray tracing cores provide hardware-accelerated ray tracing capability. The Radeon 760M's higher boost clock of 2599 MHz and higher transistor density of 142.6M per mm² also favor it in efficiency-oriented comparisons.

The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 wins in server and compute-intensive workloads. Its 96 GB HBM3 memory with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth provides massive memory capacity and throughput for data-intensive tasks. Its 312 tensor cores indicate a focus on accelerated compute workloads rather than traditional graphics rendering. The H20 NVL16 has no display outputs, confirming its role as a compute accelerator rather than a graphics card. Its 40x advantage in shading units (9984 versus 512), 9.75x advantage in texture mapping units (312 versus 32), and 10x advantage in FP32 throughput (39.54 TFLOPS versus 5.323 TFLOPS) position it for heavy parallel computation.

The H20 NVL16 also wins on absolute memory bandwidth, delivering 4.03 TB/s versus the Radeon 760M's system-dependent bandwidth. Its dedicated memory clock of 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective data rate contrasts with the Radeon 760M's shared memory approach. The H20 NVL16's PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the lane width and doubles the bus generation compared to the Radeon 760M's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface.

The Radeon 760M wins on power efficiency by a wide margin, with a TDP of 15 W versus 400 W for the H20 NVL16, a 26.7 times difference. Its smaller die size of 178 mm² versus 814 mm² also indicates a much smaller physical footprint. The Radeon 760M's release date of 2024-01-30 predates the H20 NVL16's 2025-09-01 release, making it the earlier-available product.

The percentile ranks provide context: the H20 NVL16 sits at the 50th percentile across all GPUs, while the Radeon 760M sits at the 35th percentile. For the Radeon 760M, the nearest rival comparisons show it is tightly clustered with the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (0.3% ahead), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (0.3% ahead), NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server (0.4% ahead), and NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (0.5% behind). This indicates the Radeon 760M performs at a level consistent with those mid-range parts, despite its integrated nature.