AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single recorded benchmark for the AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 516 points. This places the chip at the 1st percentile among all GPUs in the database, indicating that its performance tier sits near the very bottom of the recorded range. The NVIDIA N1 16SM currently has no benchmark entries, so its average score is recorded as 0, and its percentile is listed at 50, a default position that does not reflect measured performance.

Comparing the AMD part against its nearest recorded rivals provides context. The Intel HD Graphics P4000 scores 534 points, which is 3.4% higher than the Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU. The AMD Radeon HD 6870 scores 536 points, 3.7% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 6770M scores 569 points, 9.3% higher. Conversely, the AMD Radeon HD 6750M scores 484 points, which is 6.6% lower than the Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU. These deltas place the Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU in a narrow performance band, roughly between older mobile and desktop parts from a previous generation. The N1 16SM cannot be compared directly in any workload because no head-to-head benchmark data exists in the database. The wins tally shows zero for both parts, reflecting the absence of shared test results.

Without a recorded score for the N1 16SM, the only quantitative statement the database supports is that the Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU delivers 516 points in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, while the N1 16SM has no comparable figure. The percentiles reinforce this gap in measured data: 1st percentile versus 50th, though the latter is a placeholder rather than a result.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different manufacturers and use different process nodes. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU is built on TSMC's 4 nm process, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM uses TSMC's 5 nm node. The AMD chip, codenamed Strix Point, uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture and belongs to the Console GPU generation. The NVIDIA part uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB20B chip and is classified as a Blackwell IGP in the N1x generation.

Transistor counts differ substantially. The AMD chip contains 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 145.9 million per mm². The NVIDIA die is larger at 382 mm², but its transistor count is listed as unknown, so density cannot be computed. The larger die for NVIDIA does not necessarily imply more transistors, as the process node is older.

Clock behavior also differs. The AMD part has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2700 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a lower base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. Memory clocks are close: AMD runs at 1000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective, while NVIDIA runs at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective.

Memory configurations are very different. The AMD chip uses 16 GB of LPDDR5X on a 128-bit bus, delivering 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA chip uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. That is more than double the capacity and more than double the bandwidth of the AMD part.

Compute resources show a similar split. The AMD chip has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 48 render output units, and 16 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA chip has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 16 ray tracing cores, and 64 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has twice the shading units and twice the TMUs, but half the ROPs. The AMD part has no tensor cores listed, while the NVIDIA part includes them.

Fill rates and raw compute figures reflect these configurations. The AMD chip reaches 129.6 GPixel/s pixel rate and 172.8 GTexel/s texture rate. The NVIDIA part shows 56.30 GPixel/s pixel rate and 300.3 GTexel/s texture rate. FP32 performance is 5.530 TFLOPS for AMD and 9.609 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. Both list FP16 at the same figure as FP32 with a 1:1 ratio.

Power and interface details differ. The AMD part has a TDP of 28 W. The NVIDIA part lists TDP as unknown but specifies a slot width of IGP, indicating an integrated graphics package. Both use no power connectors. The AMD part has one USB Type-C display output, while the NVIDIA part has one HDMI output. The NVIDIA part uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the AMD part does not list a bus interface.

API support diverges. The AMD chip supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA chip lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan in the database, suggesting either a lack of support or a different driver model.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data supports only limited conclusions about workloads. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU has a measurable 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 516 points, which places it in the lowest percentile of the database. Its nearest rivals are all within a narrow range: the Intel HD Graphics P4000 is 3.4% higher, the AMD Radeon HD 6870 is 3.7% higher, the AMD Radeon HD 6770M is 9.3% higher, and the AMD Radeon HD 6750M is 6.6% lower. This suggests the AMD part is competitive with entry-level integrated graphics from a much older era, but it does not outperform any of those rivals except the HD 6750M.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM has no benchmark entries, so no measured wins can be attributed to it. Its advantages in the specification sheet, such as 9.609 TFLOPS FP32 versus 5.530 TFLOPS, higher texture rate, larger memory bus, and more shading units, indicate potential in compute-heavy or texture-bound workloads, but the database does not confirm these with test results.

For the AMD part, the data shows a low-power design with modest absolute performance. Its 28 W TDP and lack of power connectors suggest suitability for compact or fanless systems where power draw is a constraint. For the NVIDIA part, the 128 GB memory capacity and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth point toward memory-intensive tasks like large model inference or high-resolution frame buffering, but no benchmark confirms this.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher recorded benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU has a recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 516. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has no benchmark entries, so its average score is 0.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is 3.4% slower than the Intel HD Graphics P4000, 3.7% slower than the AMD Radeon HD 6870, 9.3% slower than the AMD Radeon HD 6770M, and 6.6% faster than the AMD Radeon HD 6750M.

Q: What are the memory capacities of these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 128-bit bus. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM has 2048 shading units, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU has 1024.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1 16SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Q: What is the boost clock difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU boosts to 2700 MHz, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM boosts to 2346 MHz.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear choice for buyers who need verified performance: the AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU is the only one with a measured result. Its 516 points in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, while low in absolute terms, at least confirms that it operates and delivers a baseline level of rendering capability. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has no benchmark records, so any performance claim about it cannot be substantiated from the database.

For users who prioritize raw specifications, the NVIDIA part offers more shading units, more TMUs, higher FP32 throughput, more memory, and more bandwidth. These figures are attractive on paper, but the absence of test results means the practical impact is unverified. The AMD part, by contrast, shows a complete profile: it is active, has a known TDP of 28 W, supports modern APIs, and produces a measurable score.

The specification differences point to different intended use cases. The AMD chip is a low-power part with a modest memory footprint, suitable for basic rendering tasks. The NVIDIA chip is a large integrated GPU with a massive 128 GB memory pool, suggesting a design aimed at memory-heavy applications, but the database does not confirm any workload advantage.

The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward: the AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU is the safer choice for anyone requiring a tested, working GPU with a known score. The NVIDIA N1 16SM remains an unknown quantity until benchmark results are added.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme GPU | NVIDIA N1 16SM |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 34,000 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 233 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2700 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz 8 Gbps effective | 1067 MHz 8.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 64 | 128 |

| ROPs | 48 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 16 | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 129.6 GPixel/s | 56.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 172.8 GTexel/s | 300.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.530 TFLOPS | 9.609 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.530 TFLOPS (1:1) | 9.609 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 28 W | unknown |

| Slot Width | null | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Bus Interface | null | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x USB Type-C | 1x HDMI |

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2025-07-08 | 2026-05-31 |