Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 vs NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data provides a single benchmark result for the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has no benchmark entries in the database, meaning there are no direct head-to-head measurements to compare. The Intel card sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, while the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC sits at the 100th percentile, indicating the NVIDIA part is positioned at the top of the recorded performance distribution.

The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC's nearest rivals in the database are all other NVIDIA or AMD data center accelerators. It leads the NVIDIA B200 by 7%, the NVIDIA H200 NVL by 10.4%, the AMD Instinct MI300X by 16.3%, and the NVIDIA L40S by 25%. These deltas are substantial, and the benchmark score of 369,831 is the highest average benchmark score recorded for any GPU in the database, as shown by its perfect 100th percentile rank.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100, by contrast, has zero benchmark scores and zero recorded wins in any head-to-head comparison. Its percentile rank of 50 means it sits in the middle of the database's performance distribution, but without a specific score, there is no quantitative way to compare it directly to the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC. The wins column shows 0 for the Intel part and 0 for the NVIDIA part, confirming that no head-to-head benchmark data exists between these two specific accelerators.

What can be analyzed from the raw specifications is significant. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC delivers 76.99 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 76.99 TFLOPS of FP16 compute, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 delivers 22.22 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16. That represents a 3.5x advantage for the NVIDIA part in raw floating-point throughput. The NVIDIA part also has 18,944 shading units versus 7,168 on the Intel part, and 592 tensor cores versus none listed on the Intel part. The Intel part has 56 ray tracing cores, while the NVIDIA part lists none, but the NVIDIA part is clearly not aimed at ray tracing workloads.

Memory capacity and bandwidth also show a massive gap. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has 288 GB of HBM3e memory with 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has 48 GB of HBM2e memory with 1.23 TB/s of bandwidth. The bus width is the same at 8192 bits for both, but the memory type and effective clock speeds differ dramatically. The NVIDIA memory runs at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective speed, while the Intel memory runs at 600 MHz with 1200 Mbps effective speed.

Texture performance follows a similar pattern. The NVIDIA part achieves 1,202.9 GTexel/s versus 694.4 GTexel/s for the Intel part. Pixel rate is listed as 48.77 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA part and 0 MPixel/s for the Intel part, though the Intel part's ROP count is listed as 0, which explains the zero pixel rate. The NVIDIA part has 24 ROPs.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is the stronger accelerator across every measurable specification. Its 76.99 TFLOPS FP32 performance is more than triple the Intel part's 22.22 TFLOPS. Its 288 GB memory capacity is six times larger than the Intel part's 48 GB. Its 8.19 TB/s memory bandwidth is nearly seven times higher than the Intel part's 1.23 TB/s. The NVIDIA part uses a 5 nm process from TSMC with 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, while the Intel part uses a 10 nm process from Intel with 100,000 million transistors on a 1280 mm² die.

The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC's transistor density of 127.8M per mm² is significantly higher than the Intel part's 78.1M per mm², indicating a more advanced manufacturing process. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost clock of 2032 MHz, while the Intel part has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1550 MHz. The clock speed advantage compounds the architectural advantages.

The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC was released on September 10, 2025, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 was released on January 9, 2023. The NVIDIA part is the newer product and represents a later generation, being based on the Blackwell Ultra architecture, while the Intel part is based on Generation 12.5 architecture with the Ponte Vecchio chip. The NVIDIA part's predecessor is listed as Server Hopper, and its successor is Server Rubin, placing it in a current, active product line.

The Intel part's successor is listed as H3C Graphics, indicating it has been superseded. Both parts are listed as Active in production status, but the Intel part's position in the product lifecycle is clearly earlier.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC wins in every category where both parts have recorded specifications. Compute throughput is decisively in its favor: 76.99 TFLOPS FP32 versus 22.22 TFLOPS, and 76.99 TFLOPS FP16 versus 22.22 TFLOPS. This means the NVIDIA part can handle larger floating-point workloads, whether for AI training, scientific simulation, or high-performance computing tasks.

Memory capacity is another decisive win. The 288 GB of HBM3e on the NVIDIA part supports larger models and datasets than the 48 GB of HBM2e on the Intel part. The bandwidth difference of 8.19 TB/s versus 1.23 TB/s means the NVIDIA part can feed its compute units far more quickly, reducing stalls on memory-bound workloads.

Texture rate favors the NVIDIA part at 1,202.9 GTexel/s versus 694.4 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA part also has a non-zero pixel rate of 48.77 GPixel/s, while the Intel part is listed at 0 MPixel/s due to its zero ROP count. The NVIDIA part has 592 texture mapping units versus 448 on the Intel part, and 592 tensor cores versus none listed on the Intel part. The presence of tensor cores gives the NVIDIA part a clear advantage in matrix operations common in deep learning.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 does have 56 ray tracing cores, which the NVIDIA part does not list. This is the only specification where the Intel part shows a capability that the NVIDIA part lacks. However, the NVIDIA part's API support lists DirectX as N/A, OpenGL as N/A, and Vulkan as N/A, indicating it is not designed for graphics workloads. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, though Vulkan is listed as null. The Intel part also has a dual-slot form factor versus the SXM Module form factor of the NVIDIA part, and a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface versus the NVIDIA part's PCIe 6.0 x16 interface.

Power requirements differ substantially. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has a TDP of 1100 W and a suggested PSU of 1500 W, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has a TDP of 300 W and a suggested PSU of 700 W. The Intel part uses a single 12-pin power connector, while the NVIDIA part lists no power connectors, consistent with its SXM module form factor. The Intel part is 267 mm long (10.5 inches), while the NVIDIA part lists no dimensions.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC delivers 76.99 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 delivers 22.22 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two?

A: The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has 288 GB of HBM3e memory, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has 48 GB of HBM2e memory.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC achieves 8.19 TB/s, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 achieves 1.23 TB/s. Both use an 8192-bit bus width.

Q: What are the process nodes for each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC uses a 5 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 uses a 10 nm process from Intel.

Q: Does the Intel GPU have any unique features?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 lists 56 ray tracing cores, which the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC does not list. The Intel part also supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, while the NVIDIA part lists all APIs as N/A.

Q: What benchmark score does the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC achieve?

A: The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC scores 369,831 in Geekbench OpenCL, placing it at the 100th percentile. It leads the NVIDIA B200 by 7%, the NVIDIA H200 NVL by 10.4%, the AMD Instinct MI300X by 16.3%, and the NVIDIA L40S by 25%.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC uses the GB110 chip based on the Blackwell Ultra architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 uses the Ponte Vecchio chip based on Generation 12.5 architecture, manufactured by Intel on a 10 nm process. The transistor counts differ substantially: 208,000 million on the NVIDIA part versus 100,000 million on the Intel part. Die sizes are 1628 mm² for the NVIDIA chip and 1280 mm² for the Intel chip. Transistor density is 127.8M per mm² for the NVIDIA part and 78.1M per mm² for the Intel part.

Clock speeds favor the NVIDIA part significantly. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost clock of 2032 MHz, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1550 MHz. Memory clocks also differ: the NVIDIA memory runs at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective speed, while the Intel memory runs at 600 MHz with 1200 Mbps effective speed.

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward the NVIDIA part. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, plus 592 tensor cores. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has 7,168 shading units, 448 TMUs, and 0 ROPs, plus 56 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA part lists no ray tracing cores, while the Intel part lists no tensor cores.

Memory architecture shows both parts use an 8192-bit bus, but the NVIDIA part uses HBM3e while the Intel part uses HBM2e. The NVIDIA part's 288 GB capacity and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth far exceed the Intel part's 48 GB and 1.23 TB/s. The NVIDIA part's pixel rate is 48.77 GPixel/s, while the Intel part is at 0 MPixel/s. Texture rates are 1,202.9 GTexel/s for the NVIDIA part and 694.4 GTexel/s for the Intel part.

Form factor and interface differ. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is an SXM Module with a PCIe 6.0 x16 interface, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 is a dual-slot card with a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. The NVIDIA part has no power connectors listed, while the Intel part uses a single 12-pin connector. Suggested PSU is 1500 W for the NVIDIA part and 700 W for the Intel part. TDP is 1100 W for the NVIDIA part and 300 W for the Intel part. Neither part has display outputs.

API support is another differentiator. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, while the NVIDIA part lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all as N/A. This reflects the NVIDIA part's pure compute focus. The Intel part has a length of 267 mm (10.5 inches), while the NVIDIA part lists no dimensions. Release dates differ by over two and a half years, with the Intel part launching on January 9, 2023, and the NVIDIA part on September 10, 2025. The Intel part's successor is H3C Graphics, while the NVIDIA part's successor is Server Rubin.