AMD Radeon 8065S vs NVIDIA H20 NVL16 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data places these two GPUs in entirely different segments. The AMD Radeon 8065S is an integrated graphics processor built for mobile systems, while the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 is a server accelerator designed for datacenter deployment. The AMD part wins in pixel throughput and power efficiency. Its 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate is roughly four times the H20's 47.52 GPixel/s, which makes it the stronger choice for rasterization-heavy workloads in compact systems. The NVIDIA part wins decisively in raw compute throughput, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and texture rate. The H20 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, more than 2.5 times the 15.36 TFLOPS of the 8065S. In FP16, the gap widens further, with the H20 reaching 79.07 TFLOPS against the 8065S's 15.36 TFLOPS. The H20 also carries 96 GB of HBM3 memory with 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth, while the 8065S relies on system shared memory with bandwidth that depends entirely on the host platform. The use-case split is clear: the 8065S suits graphics-oriented mobile workloads, while the H20 targets compute-heavy server tasks, particularly those involving FP16 tensor operations.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. AMD uses RDNA 3.5 on the Gorgon Halo chip, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. NVIDIA uses Hopper on the GH100 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The die sizes reflect their different roles. The GH100 measures 814 mm² and contains 80,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 98.3M per mm². The Gorgon Halo die is 308 mm², and its transistor count is listed as unknown in the database. The 8065S has 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, and 40 ray tracing cores. The H20 has 9984 shading units, 312 texture mapping units, 24 ROPs, and 312 tensor cores. The ray tracing core count for the H20 is not listed. The AMD part exposes full graphics APIs: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, confirming it is not intended for conventional graphics rendering. The 8065S is an IGP with no power connectors and a 55 W TDP. The H20 is an SXM module with a 400 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 800 W. The H20 has no display outputs; the 8065S's display outputs depend on the portable device it is integrated into. Both use a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. The H20's memory clock is 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective data rate, while the 8065S's memory clock is listed as system shared, meaning it borrows system memory rather than using dedicated VRAM.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA H20 NVL16. It delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, compared to 15.36 TFLOPS for the AMD Radeon 8065S.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has 96 GB of HBM3 memory on a 6144-bit bus with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 8065S uses system shared memory, so capacity, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent.

Q: Which GPU has better pixel throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S. Its pixel rate is 192.0 GPixel/s, while the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 achieves 47.52 GPixel/s.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has a 55 W TDP and no power connectors, as it is an integrated GPU. The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has a 400 W TDP and is an SXM module with a suggested PSU of 800 W.

Q: Do these GPUs support the same APIs?

A: No. The AMD Radeon 8065S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 lists N/A for all three APIs.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has 312 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon 8065S lists no tensor core count in the database.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ across nearly every recorded specification. The process node is 4 nm for AMD versus 5 nm for NVIDIA. Die size is 308 mm² for the 8065S versus 814 mm² for the H20. Transistor count is unknown for the 8065S, while the H20 has 80,000 million transistors. The H20's transistor density is 98.3M per mm², while the 8065S has no density listed. Base clocks are 1295 MHz for AMD and 1830 MHz for NVIDIA. Boost clocks are 3000 MHz for AMD and 1980 MHz for NVIDIA. The 8065S has no dedicated memory clock; the H20 runs at 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective. Memory size is system shared for AMD versus 96 GB for NVIDIA. Memory type is system shared versus HBM3. Bus width is system shared versus 6144 bit. Bandwidth is system dependent versus 4.03 TB/s. Shading units are 2560 versus 9984. TMUs are 160 versus 312. ROPs are 64 versus 24. Ray tracing cores are 40 on the AMD part, while the H20 lists none. Tensor cores are absent on the AMD part, while the H20 has 312. Pixel rate is 192.0 GPixel/s versus 47.52 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 480.0 GTexel/s versus 617.8 GTexel/s. FP32 is 15.36 TFLOPS versus 39.54 TFLOPS. FP16 is 15.36 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio on AMD, versus 79.07 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio on NVIDIA. TDP is 55 W versus 400 W. Slot width is IGP versus SXM Module. The 8065S has no power connectors; the H20's connector type is not listed. The suggested PSU is absent for AMD and 800 W for NVIDIA. Display outputs are portable device dependent for AMD and none for NVIDIA. The 8065S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the H20 lists N/A for all three. The 8065S's predecessor is Polaris Mobile, while the H20's predecessor is Server Ada. The H20's successor is Server Blackwell; the 8065S has no successor listed. The 8065S was released after the H20 in the database's timeline.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two GPUs, and neither part has individual benchmark scores recorded. The comparison must rely on the theoretical specification data. The largest margin in favor of the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 is in FP16 compute. The H20 produces 79.07 TFLOPS, which is 5.15 times the 15.36 TFLOPS of the AMD Radeon 8065S. This gap reflects the H20's 2:1 FP16 ratio and its 312 tensor cores, which are absent from the 8065S's specification list. FP32 also favors NVIDIA by a factor of 2.57, with 39.54 TFLOPS against 15.36 TFLOPS. Texture rate favors NVIDIA by 28.7 percent, at 617.8 GTexel/s versus 480.0 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth is not directly comparable because the 8065S's bandwidth is system dependent, but the H20's fixed 4.03 TB/s over a 6144-bit HBM3 interface represents a massive advantage for memory-bound workloads. The AMD part wins in pixel rate by a factor of 4.04, at 192.0 GPixel/s versus 47.52 GPixel/s. It also has more ROPs, 64 versus 24, and a higher boost clock, 3000 MHz versus 1980 MHz. The AMD part uses far less power, with a 55 W TDP against the H20's 400 W TDP, a 7.27 times difference. The shading unit count strongly favors NVIDIA, with 9984 versus 2560, a 3.9 times difference, while TMU counts favor NVIDIA by 1.95 times, at 312 versus 160.

The Verdict

The data points to two different buyers. The AMD Radeon 8065S is the pick for a mobile system that needs graphics output and rasterization performance. It has a 4 nm process, a 3000 MHz boost clock, 192.0 GPixel/s pixel throughput, and a 55 W TDP that fits an integrated design. It supports the full set of graphics APIs, which makes it functional for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan workloads. Its system shared memory is a limitation, but it eliminates the need for dedicated VRAM in a portable device. The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 is the pick for server deployments where compute throughput and memory capacity dominate. It offers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32, 79.07 TFLOPS of FP16, 96 GB of HBM3, 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth, and 312 tensor cores. It has no display outputs and no graphics API support, so it is not a rendering part. Its 400 W TDP and SXM form factor require a server platform with an 800 W suggested PSU. The ROP count difference, 64 versus 24, and the pixel rate difference, 192.0 GPixel/s versus 47.52 GPixel/s, confirm that the AMD part is built for graphics while the NVIDIA part is built for parallel compute. Neither part covers the other's primary use case. The 8065S cannot match the H20's memory capacity or FP16 throughput, and the H20 cannot output video or run conventional graphics APIs. The recorded data shows two specialized products with minimal overlap.