AMD Radeon 780M vs NVIDIA H20 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison: the AMD Radeon 780M has three benchmark entries, while the NVIDIA H20 has no recorded benchmark scores. The average benchmark score for the Radeon 780M sits at 17,588, placing it in the 61st percentile among all GPUs in the database. The H20, by contrast, holds a 50th percentile ranking with an average score of zero, indicating no completed test runs have been logged.

In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the Radeon 780M produces a score of 480. This is a modest result for a low-power integrated graphics processor, but it does provide a baseline for direct API-based gaming workloads. The Geekbench OpenCL score reaches 18,602, while the Vulkan score climbs to 33,683. The Vulkan result is notably stronger than the OpenCL result, a pattern that reflects the RDNA 3.0 architecture's scheduling efficiency under that API.

The Radeon 780M's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon Pro 560 with an average score of 17,551, a 0.2% gap favoring the 780M. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 scores 17,639, which is 0.3% higher than the 780M, making that desktop card a near-parity reference point. The AMD Radeon HD 7790 averages 17,666, 0.4% ahead, and the AMD Radeon Pro 460 scores 17,509, 0.5% behind. These margins are all within rounding noise, so the 780M effectively trades blows with a range of discrete GPUs across multiple generations.

Because the H20 has no benchmark records, there are no head-to-head deltas to report. The database shows winsA at zero and winsB at zero. This means the comparison must rely on architectural and specification differences rather than measured performance deltas. The H20's absence from the benchmark table is itself a data point: it indicates that no standardized tests have been run or logged for this accelerator in the database environment.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 780M wins in any scenario that requires a functioning graphics pipeline with API support. It lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, making it applicable to gaming, desktop compositing, and general-purpose graphics workloads. Its pixel rate is 92.80 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 139.2 GTexel/s, which are meaningful figures for an integrated part. The 780M also carries 12 ray tracing cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing in supported titles. Its FP32 throughput of 8.909 TFLOPS and FP16 throughput of 8.909 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio) give it balanced compute for mixed workloads.

The NVIDIA H20 wins in raw compute scale and memory capacity. It delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32, which is over four times the 780M's FP32 figure. Its FP16 rate is 79.07 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, meaning the tensor cores are heavily optimized for reduced-precision training and inference tasks. The H20 includes 312 tensor cores, a feature the 780M lacks entirely. Memory capacity is 96 GB of HBM3 across a 6144-bit bus, yielding 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth. This is a server-class memory subsystem, far beyond the system-shared memory of the 780M, which has bandwidth described as system dependent.

For gaming and client-side graphics, the 780M is the only one of the two with display outputs (motherboard dependent) and API support. The H20 lists no display outputs and no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, so it cannot drive a monitor or run conventional graphics workloads. The H20 wins in AI training, large-model inference, and high-throughput compute tasks where tensor core density and memory bandwidth dominate. The 780M wins in integrated, low-power, everyday graphics scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M has an average benchmark score of 17,588, while the NVIDIA H20 has no recorded benchmark scores and an average of zero.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The Radeon 780M sits in the 61st percentile among all GPUs, while the H20 sits in the 50th percentile.

Q: Does the NVIDIA H20 support DirectX or Vulkan?

A: No. The H20 lists DirectX as N/A, OpenGL as N/A, and Vulkan as N/A, and it has no display outputs.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The 780M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, while the H20 has 96 GB of HBM3 memory on a 6144-bit bus with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the FP32 compute figures compare?

A: The Radeon 780M delivers 8.909 TFLOPS of FP32, while the H20 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS, a gap of roughly 4.4 times.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA H20 has tensor cores, with 312 of them. The Radeon 780M lists no tensor cores.

Specification Differences

The two devices differ across nearly every measured specification. The process nodes are distinct: the 780M uses a 4 nm node at TSMC, while the H20 uses a 5 nm node at the same foundry. Transistor counts diverge sharply, with the 780M at 25,390 million and the H20 at 80,000 million. Die size also differs, with the 780M at 178 mm² and the H20 at 814 mm². Transistor density favors the 780M at 142.6M per mm² versus 98.3M per mm² for the H20.

Clock speeds show a different design philosophy. The 780M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, while the H20 runs a base of 1830 MHz and a boost of 1980 MHz. The H20's memory clock is listed at 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective, whereas the 780M's memory clock is system shared.

The compute unit counts are far apart. The 780M has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The H20 has 9,984 shading units, 312 TMUs, and only 24 ROPs. Ray tracing cores appear only on the 780M (12), while tensor cores appear only on the H20 (312). Pixel rates are 92.80 GPixel/s for the 780M and 47.52 GPixel/s for the H20, despite the H20's larger shading unit count. Texture rates are 139.2 GTexel/s versus 617.8 GTexel/s, a large advantage for the H20.

Power envelopes are drastically different. The 780M has a TDP of 15 W and no power connectors, while the H20 has a TDP of 500 W and a suggested PSU of 900 W. The slot width also differs: the 780M is an IGP, while the H20 is an SXM Module. Bus interfaces vary, with the 780M using PCIe 4.0 x8 and the H20 using PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are motherboard dependent for the 780M and absent for the H20.

Release dates are one day apart in the database: the 780M launched on 2024-01-30, and the H20 on 2024-01-31. Production status is active for both. The 780M lists its predecessor as Navi II IGP and successor as Navi III IGP, while the H20 lists its predecessor as Server Ada and successor as Server Blackwell.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 780M is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, specifically the Phoenix chip, and belongs to the Navi III IGP generation. This is a graphics-first design optimized for integrated use within a processor package. The 4 nm process allows a high transistor density of 142.6M per mm², and the 15 W TDP indicates a design focused on efficiency within a constrained thermal budget. The architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it a full-featured client GPU despite its integrated nature. The 12 ray tracing cores are part of RDNA 3.0's second-generation RT implementation, providing hardware acceleration for ray-traced effects. The FP16 and FP32 rates are identical at 8.909 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio, which is typical for RDNA designs that do not double-rate FP16.

The NVIDIA H20 is built on the Hopper architecture with the GH100 chip, part of the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation. Hopper is a data center-focused architecture, and the H20's specification list reflects that: no display outputs, no graphics APIs, and a 500 W TDP with an SXM module form factor. The 5 nm process yields a lower transistor density of 98.3M per mm², but the absolute transistor count is over three times higher at 80,000 million. The 312 tensor cores are central to the H20's purpose, enabling matrix math for AI workloads. The FP16 rate of 79.07 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio indicates that the tensor cores are the primary compute path, and they operate at double the FP32 rate of 39.54 TFLOPS. The H20's 96 GB of HBM3 memory with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth is a server-class memory subsystem designed to hold large models and datasets.

The 780M's cache hierarchy and memory architecture are system dependent, as the GPU shares main memory with the host processor. The H20, by contrast, has a dedicated HBM3 stack with a 6144-bit bus, which eliminates memory bandwidth contention. The ROP count is higher on the 780M (32 versus 24), which is notable given the H20's much larger die; this suggests the H20's ROPs are not optimized for pixel throughput, consistent with its lack of display output. The texture rate advantage of the H20 (617.8 GTexel/s versus 139.2 GTexel/s) reflects its much higher TMU count of 312, which serves compute workloads that require texture sampling or similar data access patterns.

Both chips use TSMC as the foundry, but the node difference (4 nm versus 5 nm) gives the 780M a density advantage. The H20 compensates with sheer scale: more shaders, more TMUs, more tensor cores, and a much larger memory pool. The architecture difference is fundamental: RDNA 3.0 is a graphics architecture with compute capabilities, while Hopper is a compute architecture with no graphics pipeline. The database records no benchmark scores for the H20, which aligns with its role as a specialized accelerator that may not be tested under standard GPU benchmarks. The 780M, in contrast, has three recorded tests and a percentile rank of 61, indicating it competes with mid-range discrete GPUs from several generations prior.