Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 and NVIDIA B200 SXM6 occupy different segments of the accelerator market, and the recorded data shows a clear performance hierarchy. The B200 SXM6 holds decisive advantages in raw compute throughput, memory capacity, and bandwidth, while the Max 1100 offers a lower power envelope and a different architectural approach. Since neither part has benchmark scores recorded in the database, this analysis relies entirely on the technical specifications and the derived capabilities from those specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct benchmark results for either accelerator, so the comparison must be built from the measured specifications. The most telling differentiator is FP32 compute. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 produces 22.22 TFLOPS. That places the B200 SXM6 approximately 3.1 times ahead of the Max 1100 in single-precision floating-point work. This is a substantial gap, and it directly impacts any workload that relies on FP32 math, such as simulation, rendering, or general-purpose data processing.

The FP16 figures mirror the FP32 numbers exactly for both parts. The B200 SXM6 achieves 69.34 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1), and the Max 1100 achieves 22.22 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1). The 1:1 ratio means neither card sacrifices FP16 throughput relative to FP32, but the B200 SXM6 still holds the same 3.1x lead in half-precision workloads. For machine learning inference or training that uses FP16, the B200 SXM6 is the clear performance leader.

Texture throughput also favors the NVIDIA part. The B200 SXM6 reaches 1,083.4 GTexel/s, while the Max 1100 reaches 694.4 GTexel/s. That is a 56% advantage for the B200 SXM6 in texture fill rate, which matters for graphics-related tasks or any workload that samples textures heavily. Pixel rate shows an even starker contrast. The Max 1100 is rated at 0 MPixel/s, meaning it has no pixel output capability, while the B200 SXM6 delivers 43.92 GPixel/s. The Max 1100 has zero ROPs, while the B200 SXM6 has 24 ROPs. This makes the B200 SXM6 the only one of the two capable of rasterization output.

Memory bandwidth is another area where the B200 SXM6 dominates. The NVIDIA part offers 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, versus 1.23 TB/s for the Intel part. That is a 6.7x difference in favor of the B200 SXM6. In memory-bound workloads, such as large matrix operations or data streaming, the B200 SXM6 can move data far faster. The Max 1100’s 1.23 TB/s is not negligible, but it is clearly a lower tier of memory performance.

There are no recorded wins in the head-to-head benchmark section, and the wins counters for both parts sit at zero. The data does not contain any simulated or aggregated benchmark scores. The percentile ranking for both GPUs is 50, which places both in the middle of the database’s distribution, but without actual scores, this percentile is based on specification-derived estimates rather than measured results.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators use fundamentally different silicon designs. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 is built on Intel’s Ponte Vecchio chip, using the Generation 12.5 architecture. The process node is 10 nm, fabricated by Intel. The die size is 1280 mm², and it contains 100,000 million transistors. This translates to a transistor density of 78.1 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip, built on the Blackwell architecture. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process from TSMC. The die size is 1628 mm², and it packs 208,000 million transistors, giving a density of 127.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The B200 SXM6 has more than twice the transistor count of the Max 1100, on a larger die, with a significantly higher density.

The memory subsystems differ entirely. The Max 1100 comes with 48 GB of HBM2e memory, using an 8192-bit bus. The B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e, also on an 8192-bit bus. The B200 SXM6 therefore has 3.75 times the capacity and uses a newer memory type. The bandwidth difference of 6.7x is a direct result of the HBM3e generation jump. The base clock of the B200 SXM6 is 120 MHz, with a boost of 1830 MHz. The Max 1100 has a base of 1000 MHz and a boost of 1550 MHz. The NVIDIA part boosts 18% higher, despite having a much lower base clock.

Shader resources also diverge sharply. The B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. It also includes 592 tensor cores. The Max 1100 has 7,168 shading units, 448 TMUs, and zero ROPs. It has 56 ray tracing cores, while the B200 SXM6 has no ray tracing core count listed. The tensor core count for the Max 1100 is not listed in the database. The B200 SXM6’s tensor cores are a dedicated feature for AI acceleration, while the Max 1100 relies on its shading units and ray tracing cores for compute. The B200 SXM6 has no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, which is consistent with its server-focused design. The Max 1100 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, but it has no display outputs.

The power profiles are very different. The Max 1100 has a TDP of 300 W and uses a single 12-pin power connector, with a suggested PSU of 700 W. The B200 SXM6 has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The B200 SXM6 consumes over three times the power of the Max 1100. The slot format also differs: the Max 1100 is a dual-slot PCIe card, while the B200 SXM6 is an SXM module designed for server chassis. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 for the Max 1100 and PCIe 6.0 x16 for the B200 SXM6.

The Max 1100 measures 267 mm in length, which is 10.5 inches. The B200 SXM6 has no length dimensions recorded. The Max 1100 was released in January 2023, while the B200 SXM6 came later in October 2024. The B200 SXM6 lists its predecessor as Server Hopper and successor as Server Rubin. The Max 1100 lists no predecessor, and its successor is H3C Graphics. The B200 SXM6 has a launch MSRP of 34,999 USD, while the Max 1100 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 wins in every compute-heavy category. FP32 and FP16 throughput are each 3.1x higher, texture rate is 56% higher, and pixel rate is effectively infinite compared to the Max 1100’s zero pixel output. Memory bandwidth is 6.7x higher, and memory capacity is 3.75x larger. For any workload that stresses raw mathematical throughput or large dataset movement, the B200 SXM6 is the superior part. The tensor cores on the B200 SXM6 provide dedicated hardware for matrix operations, which the Max 1100 lacks. The B200 SXM6 also supports PCIe 6.0, which doubles the interconnect bandwidth potential versus the Max 1100’s PCIe 5.0.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 wins in power efficiency and form factor flexibility. At 300 W TDP, it uses 70% less power than the B200 SXM6’s 1000 W TDP. This makes it more suitable for systems with lower power budgets or less robust cooling infrastructure. The dual-slot PCIe form factor allows installation in standard server slots, whereas the SXM module requires a proprietary chassis. The Max 1100 also has ray tracing cores, which the B200 SXM6 does not list, so ray-traced workloads would run on the Intel part. The Max 1100 supports DirectX 12 and OpenGL, which the B200 SXM6 does not, so it has broader API compatibility for legacy or graphics-oriented applications, even without display outputs.

The Max 1100’s 48 GB of HBM2e is still a large memory pool, and its 1.23 TB/s bandwidth is respectable, but it is clearly below the B200 SXM6’s tier. The Max 1100 benefits from a lower suggested PSU requirement of 700 W, compared to 1400 W for the B200 SXM6, which reduces system-level power infrastructure demands. The Max 1100’s 10 nm process is older than the B200 SXM6’s 5 nm process, but the Max 1100’s lower power target is a deliberate design choice for density and efficiency in constrained environments.

The Verdict

The benchmark data, while not containing direct scores, points to a clear division of roles. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is the high-performance compute accelerator. Its 69.34 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16, 180 GB of HBM3e, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth make it the choice for large-scale AI training, scientific computing, and any workload where maximum throughput is the priority. The 1000 W TDP and SXM module format are accepted trade-offs in a server environment designed for such parts. The 34,999 USD launch MSRP is a single data point in the database and reflects its enterprise positioning.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 serves a different purpose. Its 300 W TDP, dual-slot PCIe form factor, and 48 GB memory make it a viable option for systems where power density or physical compatibility is a constraint. The 22.22 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 performance is still substantial, and the ray tracing cores add a capability the B200 SXM6 does not list. The 1.23 TB/s bandwidth is sufficient for many workloads, though it trails the B200 SXM6 by a wide margin.

The data shows that the B200 SXM6 is the faster part in every measured compute metric. The Max 1100 is the more power-efficient and physically flexible part. There is no scenario in the recorded data where the Max 1100 outperforms the B200 SXM6 in raw speed, but there are scenarios where the Max 1100’s lower power and broader API support are advantageous. The B200 SXM6 is for users who need maximum compute and have the power and chassis to accommodate it. The Max 1100 is for users who need a capable compute accelerator in a standard PCIe slot with a restrained power budget.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 delivers 22.22 TFLOPS. The B200 SXM6 is approximately 3.1 times faster in FP32.

Q: What are the memory capacities of each accelerator?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has 48 GB of HBM2e memory, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e memory. The B200 SXM6 also has higher bandwidth at 8.19 TB/s versus 1.23 TB/s.

Q: Does the Intel Max 1100 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 includes 56 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 does not list any ray tracing cores in the database.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has a TDP of 300 W with a suggested PSU of 700 W. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has a TDP of 1000 W with a suggested PSU of 1400 W.

Q: What form factors do the two GPUs use?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 is a dual-slot PCIe 5.0 x16 card measuring 267 mm in length. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is an SXM module with a PCIe 6.0 x16 interface.

Q: Which architecture does each GPU use?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 uses the Generation 12.5 architecture with the Ponte Vecchio chip on a 10 nm process. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses the Blackwell architecture with the GB100 chip on a 5 nm process.