AMD Radeon 890M vs NVIDIA H20 NVL16 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Radeon 890M and the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 occupy entirely different segments of the GPU spectrum, and direct benchmark comparisons are limited by the fact that the H20 NVL16 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. The 890M, by contrast, has a full suite of measurements across multiple test suites.

The 890M's average benchmark score is 9210, placing it in the 45th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon Vega 8 (average score 9221, delta of -0.1%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (average score 9273, delta of -0.7%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (average score 9294, delta of -0.9%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (average score 9302, delta of -1%). These deltas are all negative, meaning the 890M trails each of these rivals by small margins, ranging from 0.1% to 1%. The narrow deltas indicate that the 890M is performance-equivalent to a cluster of older discrete desktop and mobile GPUs.

Within the 890M's own benchmark results, the strongest showing is in Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 40808, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 37254. The Passmark G3D score is 8076, while the Passmark G2D score is 979. Compute-oriented workloads show a Passmark GPU Compute score of 4157. The DirectX results are more modest: Passmark DirectX 9 scores 97, DirectX 11 scores 73, DirectX 12 scores 37, and DirectX 10 scores 33. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 590.

Because the H20 NVL16 has zero recorded benchmarks, its average benchmark score is 0, and it has no nearest rivals listed. The database indicates its percentile versus all GPUs is 50, which is higher than the 890M's 45th percentile, but this is based on the H20's classification rather than any measured performance data. The head-to-head benchmark comparison is therefore one-sided: all recorded scores belong to the 890M, and the H20 NVL16 cannot be positioned against them with quantitative deltas.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is substantial. The AMD Radeon 890M uses the Strix Point chip built on RDNA 3.5 architecture, belonging to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 145.9 million transistors per mm².

The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 uses the GH100 chip built on Hopper architecture, belonging to the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 98.3 million transistors per mm². The H20's die is more than three times larger in area, and its transistor count is more than double that of the 890M, but its density is lower due to the larger process node and die size.

The compute resources differ dramatically. The 890M has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 raster output units, and 16 ray tracing cores. It has no dedicated tensor cores. The H20 NVL16 has 9984 shading units, 312 texture mapping units, 24 raster output units, and 312 tensor cores. The H20 has no listed ray tracing cores. The shading unit count is nearly ten times higher on the H20, and the tensor core presence indicates a design aimed at AI and deep learning workloads, whereas the 890M relies on its RDNA 3.5 shader array and ray tracing hardware.

Clock speeds also differ. The 890M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The H20 NVL16 has a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 1980 MHz. The 890M's boost clock is significantly higher, but the H20 compensates with its massive parallel width. Memory configurations are entirely different: the 890M uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth, while the H20 NVL16 has 96 GB of HBM3 memory on a 6144-bit bus with 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth. The H20's memory clock is 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective speed.

Power and form factor differences are stark. The 890M is rated at 15 W TDP, uses an IGP slot width, has no power connectors, and offers a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The H20 NVL16 is rated at 400 W TDP, uses an SXM Module slot width, has a suggested PSU of 800 W, and offers a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. The 890M has portable device dependent display outputs, while the H20 NVL16 has no display outputs at all. In terms of API support, the 890M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the H20 NVL16 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon 890M has an average benchmark score of 9210, while the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has an average benchmark score of 0 due to having no recorded benchmark results.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The AMD Radeon 890M has a transistor density of 145.9 million transistors per mm², while the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has a density of 98.3 million transistors per mm².

Q: Does the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 support DirectX?

A: The database lists DirectX support as N/A for the NVIDIA H20 NVL16, whereas the AMD Radeon 890M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The AMD Radeon 890M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, while the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has 96 GB of HBM3 memory with a 6144-bit bus and 4.03 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has 312 tensor cores, while the AMD Radeon 890M has no tensor cores listed in the database.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon 890M is rated at 15 W, while the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 is rated at 400 W.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field in the database.

Process node: The AMD Radeon 890M uses a 4 nm process, while the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 uses a 5 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

Transistors: The 890M has 34,000 million transistors, while the H20 NVL16 has 80,000 million transistors.

Die size: The 890M has a die size of 233 mm², while the H20 NVL16 has a die size of 814 mm².

Transistor density: The 890M has 145.9 million transistors per mm², while the H20 NVL16 has 98.3 million transistors per mm².

Base clock: The 890M has a base clock of 400 MHz, while the H20 NVL16 has a base clock of 1830 MHz.

Boost clock: The 890M has a boost clock of 2900 MHz, while the H20 NVL16 has a boost clock of 1980 MHz.

Memory size: The 890M uses system shared memory, while the H20 NVL16 has 96 GB of HBM3 memory.

Memory bus width: The 890M uses a system shared bus width, while the H20 NVL16 has a 6144-bit bus.

Memory bandwidth: The 890M has system dependent bandwidth, while the H20 NVL16 has 4.03 TB/s bandwidth.

Shading units: The 890M has 1024 shading units, while the H20 NVL16 has 9984 shading units.

Texture mapping units: The 890M has 64 TMUs, while the H20 NVL16 has 312 TMUs.

Raster output units: The 890M has 32 ROPs, while the H20 NVL16 has 24 ROPs.

Ray tracing cores: The 890M has 16 ray tracing cores, while the H20 NVL16 has no ray tracing cores listed.

Tensor cores: The 890M has no tensor cores listed, while the H20 NVL16 has 312 tensor cores.

Pixel rate: The 890M has a pixel rate of 92.80 GPixel/s, while the H20 NVL16 has a pixel rate of 47.52 GPixel/s.

Texture rate: The 890M has a texture rate of 185.6 GTexel/s, while the H20 NVL16 has a texture rate of 617.8 GTexel/s.

FP32 performance: The 890M has 5.939 TFLOPS, while the H20 NVL16 has 39.54 TFLOPS.

FP16 performance: The 890M has 5.939 TFLOPS (1:1), while the H20 NVL16 has 79.07 TFLOPS (2:1).

TDP: The 890M is rated at 15 W, while the H20 NVL16 is rated at 400 W.

Slot width: The 890M uses an IGP slot width, while the H20 NVL16 uses an SXM Module slot width.

Power connectors: The 890M has no power connectors, while the H20 NVL16 has no listed power connectors.

Suggested PSU: The 890M has no suggested PSU listed, while the H20 NVL16 has a suggested PSU of 800 W.

Bus interface: The 890M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the H20 NVL16 uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

Display outputs: The 890M has portable device dependent outputs, while the H20 NVL16 has no outputs.

API support: The 890M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the H20 NVL16 lists N/A for all three.

Release date: The 890M was released on 2024-07-14, while the H20 NVL16 was released on 2025-09-01.

Predecessor: The 890M's predecessor is Navi II IGP, while the H20 NVL16's predecessor is Server Ada.

Successor: The 890M has no successor listed, while the H20 NVL16's successor is Server Blackwell.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two GPUs serve fundamentally different purposes. The AMD Radeon 890M is an integrated graphics processor designed for mobile devices, with a 15 W TDP, system shared memory, and display outputs that depend on the portable device. Its benchmark results show it performs in the 45th percentile of all GPUs, closely matching a cluster of older discrete GPUs like the GeForce GTX 960 and GTX 465, with deltas under 1%. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it suitable for consumer graphics workloads.

The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 is a server-class accelerator with a 400 W TDP, 96 GB of HBM3 memory, 4.03 TB/s bandwidth, and 312 tensor cores. It has no display outputs, no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, and no recorded benchmark scores in the database. Its percentile ranking of 50 is based on classification rather than measurement. The presence of tensor cores and the massive FP16 throughput of 79.07 TFLOPS indicate a design aimed at AI inference and training workloads, not traditional graphics rendering.

The recorded data shows the 890M as the only one of the two with measurable graphics performance. The H20 NVL16's strengths are in compute and memory bandwidth, but the database provides no benchmark scores to quantify them. Users requiring a GPU for consumer graphics applications, DirectX or Vulkan workloads, or portable devices would select the 890M. Users requiring a server accelerator with high memory capacity, tensor core compute, and no display output would select the H20 NVL16. The choice depends entirely on the workload, as the two GPUs share almost no common ground in specifications or intended use cases.