AMD Radeon 8065S vs NVIDIA H100 CNX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct benchmark scores for either the AMD Radeon 8065S or the NVIDIA H100 CNX. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero and no head-to-head benchmark results are available. The absence of measured data means numerical comparison of their actual performance in applications or games cannot be established from the database. What can be compared are the theoretical peak rates derived from their clock speeds and core configurations, which the database does record.

The AMD Radeon 8065S reaches a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s, which is 147.72 GPixel/s higher than the NVIDIA H100 CNX's 44.28 GPixel/s. This difference indicates the AMD part is configured for significantly faster rasterization output per clock cycle. The texture rate shows a different relationship: the NVIDIA H100 CNX delivers 841.3 GTexel/s versus 480.0 GTexel/s for the AMD Radeon 8065S, a gap of 361.3 GTexel/s in favor of the NVIDIA product. These two rates point to divergent design priorities, with AMD emphasizing pixel throughput and NVIDIA concentrating on texture and compute throughput.

In floating-point performance, the NVIDIA H100 CNX records 53.84 TFLOPS for FP32 operations, which is 38.48 TFLOPS above the AMD Radeon 8065S's 15.36 TFLOPS. The FP16 comparison is even more lopsided. The NVIDIA H100 CNX lists 215.4 TFLOPS with a 4:1 ratio, while the AMD Radeon 8065S lists 15.36 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The NVIDIA product's FP16 capability exceeds the AMD part by a factor of roughly 14 when accounting for the ratio difference. The database indicates the AMD part's FP16 throughput equals its FP32 throughput, whereas the NVIDIA part's FP16 throughput is four times its FP32 throughput, reflecting a dedicated tensor-heavy architecture.

Memory bandwidth also separates the two clearly. The NVIDIA H100 CNX has 2.04 TB/s of bandwidth across an 80 GB HBM2e frame buffer with a 5120-bit bus. The AMD Radeon 8065S uses system-shared memory with bandwidth listed as system dependent, so no fixed bandwidth figure exists for direct comparison. The NVIDIA product's memory subsystem is a discrete, high-bandwidth design, while the AMD product relies on shared system memory, which ties its effective performance to the host platform.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 8065S wins in pixel throughput. Its 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate exceeds the NVIDIA H100 CNX's 44.28 GPixel/s by 147.72 GPixel/s, making it the stronger choice for workloads that stress fill-rate-limited rasterization, such as high-resolution rendering pipelines that output many pixels per frame. The AMD part also operates within a 55 W TDP, which is 295 W below the NVIDIA H100 CNX's 350 W TDP. That power envelope, combined with its integrated graphics processor form factor and no power connectors, positions it for compact or mobile platforms where the NVIDIA dual-slot, 8-pin EPS design would not fit.

The NVIDIA H100 CNX wins decisively in compute throughput. Its 53.84 TFLOPS FP32 performance is 38.48 TFLOPS higher than the AMD Radeon 8065S, and its 215.4 TFLOPS FP16 performance dwarfs the AMD part's 15.36 TFLOPS. The 456 tensor cores on the NVIDIA product provide a hardware path for matrix operations that the AMD product lacks entirely, as the AMD entry lists no tensor cores. Texture rate also favors NVIDIA at 841.3 GTexel/s compared to 480.0 GTexel/s. The 80 GB HBM2e memory with 2.04 TB/s bandwidth gives the NVIDIA part a clear advantage for large datasets that exceed the AMD part's system-shared memory pool. The NVIDIA H100 CNX is built for server-class compute, as indicated by its Server Hopper generation and lack of display outputs, while the AMD Radeon 8065S belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation and is designed around portable device dependent display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 8065S uses the Gorgon Halo chip built on RDNA 3.5 architecture at a 4 nm process node from TSMC. The die size is 308 mm². The NVIDIA H100 CNX uses the GH100 chip built on Hopper architecture at a 5 nm process node, also from TSMC. Its die size is 814 mm², which is 506 mm² larger than the AMD chip. The NVIDIA chip contains 80,000 million transistors, while the AMD entry lists transistor count as unknown. The transistor density for the NVIDIA chip is recorded as 98.3M / mm².

The AMD Radeon 8065S has 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, and 40 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA H100 CNX has 14592 shading units, 456 texture mapping units, 24 ROPs, and 456 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has no ray tracing cores listed, and the AMD part has no tensor cores listed. The shading unit count on the NVIDIA product is 12032 higher than on the AMD product, which explains much of its FP32 throughput advantage. The ROP count, however, is 40 higher on the AMD product, which aligns with its pixel rate lead.

The NVIDIA H100 CNX is manufactured on a larger, more complex die and consumes more power. Its 350 W TDP is 295 W higher than the AMD Radeon 8065S's 55 W TDP. The NVIDIA part is a dual-slot card requiring an 8-pin EPS power connector and a suggested PSU of 750 W, while the AMD part is an integrated graphics processor with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The NVIDIA product has no display outputs, while the AMD product lists portable device dependent outputs. The NVIDIA product measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height; the AMD product has no recorded dimensions because it is an integrated processor.

Specification Differences

The two products differ across nearly every recorded specification. The AMD Radeon 8065S has a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz. The NVIDIA H100 CNX has a base clock of 690 MHz and a boost clock of 1845 MHz. The AMD part's base clock is 605 MHz higher, and its boost clock is 1155 MHz higher. The NVIDIA part's memory clock is 1593 MHz with 3.2 Gbps effective speed. The AMD part's memory clock is system shared.

Memory configuration differs fundamentally. The NVIDIA H100 CNX has 80 GB of HBM2e memory on a 5120-bit bus with 2.04 TB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 8065S has system shared memory with a system shared bus width and system dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA part carries 14592 shading units, 456 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The AMD part carries 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has 456 tensor cores and no ray tracing cores. The AMD part has 40 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores.

API support also separates them. The AMD Radeon 8065S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA H100 CNX lists no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support in the database. The AMD product is in the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation with a release date of 2025-12-31, while the NVIDIA product is in the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation with a release date of 2023-03-20. The predecessor for the AMD part is Polaris Mobile, while the predecessor for the NVIDIA part is Server Ada. The NVIDIA part has a successor listed as Server Blackwell; the AMD part has no successor. The NVIDIA part has a TDP of 350 W, a dual-slot width, an 8-pin EPS connector, and a 750 W suggested PSU. The AMD part has a 55 W TDP, an IGP slot width, and no power connectors. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interfaces. Both products are listed as active in production. Neither product has a launch MSRP recorded in the database. Both products have a percentile vs all GPUs of 50, and neither has nearest rivals listed.

FAQ

Q: Which product has higher FP32 floating-point performance?

A: The NVIDIA H100 CNX records 53.84 TFLOPS FP32, which is 38.48 TFLOPS higher than the AMD Radeon 8065S's 15.36 TFLOPS.

Q: How does the pixel rate compare between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s, which is 147.72 GPixel/s higher than the NVIDIA H100 CNX's 44.28 GPixel/s.

Q: What memory configuration does each product use?

A: The NVIDIA H100 CNX uses 80 GB of HBM2e memory on a 5120-bit bus with 2.04 TB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 8065S uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 8065S have tensor cores?

A: No. The AMD Radeon 8065S lists no tensor cores, while the NVIDIA H100 CNX lists 456 tensor cores. The AMD part instead lists 40 ray tracing cores, while the NVIDIA part lists none.

Q: What are the power requirements for each product?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has a 55 W TDP with no power connectors. The NVIDIA H100 CNX has a 350 W TDP, requires an 8-pin EPS connector, and suggests a 750 W PSU.

Q: Which product supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA H100 CNX lists no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support in the database.

The Verdict

The data points to two different product categories. The AMD Radeon 8065S is a low-power integrated graphics processor from the Navi Mobile generation, built for portable devices. The NVIDIA H100 CNX is a server-class accelerator from the Hopper generation, built for compute workloads in data centers. The AMD part wins on pixel rate, 192.0 GPixel/s versus 44.28 GPixel/s, and on power efficiency, 55 W versus 350 W. It also offers display outputs and consumer graphics API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part wins on raw compute, with 53.84 TFLOPS FP32 and 215.4 TFLOPS FP16, plus 456 tensor cores and 80 GB of HBM2e memory at 2.04 TB/s. It has no display outputs and no consumer graphics API support listed.

The choice depends on the workload recorded in the database. For rasterization-heavy tasks that require high pixel throughput, the AMD Radeon 8065S's 192.0 GPixel/s and 64 ROPs provide the stronger configuration. For FP32 or FP16 compute, matrix operations, or large memory footprints, the NVIDIA H100 CNX's 53.84 TFLOPS FP32, 215.4 TFLOPS FP16, 456 tensor cores, and 80 GB memory capacity are clearly superior. The NVIDIA part's texture rate of 841.3 GTexel/s also exceeds the AMD part's 480.0 GTexel/s. The AMD part's 3000 MHz boost clock is higher than the NVIDIA part's 1845 MHz boost clock, but the NVIDIA part compensates with over five times the shading units. The NVIDIA H100 CNX is the compute leader in every measured throughput category except pixel rate and power consumption. The AMD Radeon 8065S is the only one of the two that can function as a display-capable graphics solution in a portable form factor. The database records no benchmark scores for either product, so these conclusions rest entirely on the recorded theoretical specifications.