Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 vs NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Super Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 and the NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Super target entirely different segments of the GPU market. The Intel part is a massive accelerator designed for data center compute workloads, while the NVIDIA module is a compact system-on-chip for edge and embedded applications. Based on the recorded specifications, the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 delivers 22.22 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is roughly 10.6 times the 2.089 TFLOPS offered by the Jetson Orin Nano Super. In FP16 compute, the Intel part matches its FP32 output at 22.22 TFLOPS, while the NVIDIA module reaches 4.178 TFLOPS due to its 2:1 ratio. The Intel card carries 48 GB of HBM2e memory with 1.23 TB/s bandwidth, versus 8 GB of LPDDR5 at 102.4 GB/s for the NVIDIA module. The data clearly indicates that the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 is the choice for high-throughput parallel compute, while the Jetson Orin Nano Super is suited for low-power embedded inference where its 25 W TDP and integrated form factor matter more than raw throughput.

Both parts sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, though neither has recorded benchmark scores or nearest rivals in the database. The absence of measured results means the comparison rests entirely on specification analysis. The Intel accelerator uses a 10 nm process from Intel Foundry, packs 100,000 million transistors on a 1280 mm² die, and requires a 700 W suggested power supply. The NVIDIA module uses Samsung's 8 nm process, has a 200 mm² die with undisclosed transistor count, and draws only 25 W. These are not competing products in any practical sense; they serve different deployment scenarios, and the verdict is that the Intel part wins decisively on raw compute and memory capacity, while the NVIDIA part wins on power efficiency and physical footprint.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 wins in every raw performance category documented in the database. Its FP32 throughput of 22.22 TFLOPS dwarfs the 2.089 TFLOPS of the Jetson Orin Nano Super. Its FP16 output of 22.22 TFLOPS is 5.3 times the 4.178 TFLOPS of the NVIDIA module. The Intel card's texture rate reaches 694.4 GTexel/s, compared to 32.64 GTexel/s for the Jetson, a gap of more than 21 times. Memory bandwidth tells a similar story: 1.23 TB/s versus 102.4 GB/s, a 12-fold difference. The Intel part also has 7168 shading units, 448 texture mapping units, and 56 ray tracing cores, while the NVIDIA module has 1024 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 32 tensor cores. The Intel card supports PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Jetson uses PCIe 4.0 x4.

The NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Super wins in power consumption and physical size. Its 25 W TDP is one-twelfth of the Intel card's 300 W TDP. The Jetson module measures 70 mm by 45 mm, while the Intel card stretches 267 mm in length and uses a dual-slot design. The NVIDIA part is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no external power connector, while the Intel card requires a single 12-pin connector and a 700 W suggested power supply. The Jetson also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the Intel part lists DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6 with no Vulkan support recorded. For deployment scenarios where power, heat, or space are constrained, the Jetson Orin Nano Super is the only viable option in this comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 uses the Ponte Vecchio chip built on Intel's Generation 12.5 architecture, manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel Foundry. The NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Super uses the GA10B chip based on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process. The Intel die measures 1280 mm² and contains 100,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 78.1 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA die is 200 mm², and its transistor count is not recorded in the database.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The Intel card uses 48 GB of HBM2e with an 8192-bit bus and 1.23 TB/s bandwidth, with memory clocked at 600 MHz and 1200 Mbps effective. The Jetson uses 8 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth and memory clocked at 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective. The Intel part's memory bus width is 64 times wider than the Jetson's, which explains the massive bandwidth advantage despite lower effective clock speeds.

The compute pipelines diverge as well. The Intel card has 7168 shading units, 448 TMUs, and 0 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, indicating it is not designed for rasterization output. The Jetson has 1024 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 16.32 GPixel/s. The Intel part includes 56 ray tracing cores but no tensor cores; the Jetson includes 32 tensor cores but no ray tracing cores. The FP16 execution mode also differs: the Intel card runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the Jetson runs FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, doubling its throughput in that precision.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 delivers 22.22 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Super delivers 2.089 TFLOPS. The Intel part is approximately 10.6 times faster in FP32.

Q: How do their memory capacities and bandwidths compare?

A: The Intel card has 48 GB of HBM2e memory with 1.23 TB/s bandwidth on an 8192-bit bus. The Jetson has 8 GB of LPDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has a TDP of 300 W and requires a 700 W suggested power supply. The NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Super has a TDP of 25 W and requires no external power connector.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 includes 56 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Super does not list any ray tracing cores.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Super includes 32 tensor cores. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 does not list tensor cores in its specifications.

Q: What is the physical size difference?

A: The Intel card is 267 mm long and uses a dual-slot design. The Jetson module is 70 mm by 45 mm and is an integrated graphics processor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for these two GPUs. Both parts have zero benchmark scores in the database, and the wins count is zero for each side. This means the comparison must rely on the documented specification data, which shows overwhelming advantages for the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 in compute and memory, and for the NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Super in power and size.

The largest FP32 gap in the comparison is the difference between 22.22 TFLOPS and 2.089 TFLOPS. The Intel accelerator is 20.131 TFLOPS ahead, representing a 10.6 times advantage. In FP16, the Intel card outputs 22.22 TFLOPS versus 4.178 TFLOPS for the Jetson, a difference of 18.042 TFLOPS and a 5.3 times advantage. The texture rate comparison shows 694.4 GTexel/s versus 32.64 GTexel/s, with the Intel part ahead by 661.76 GTexel/s, a 21.3 times gap. Memory bandwidth shows 1.23 TB/s versus 102.4 GB/s, a 12 times difference in favor of the Intel card.

The Jetson counters in pixel rate, where it achieves 16.32 GPixel/s while the Intel card records 0 MPixel/s. The Intel part has no ROPs and no display outputs, confirming it is not designed for rasterized graphics rendering. The Jetson also leads in API support for modern graphics, offering DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Intel card lists DirectX 12 (12_1) and no Vulkan support. The Jetson's 32 tensor cores provide a hardware path for AI inference workloads, while the Intel card's 56 ray tracing cores target different compute patterns.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every recorded specification field. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 uses a 10 nm process from Intel Foundry, while the Jetson Orin Nano Super uses an 8 nm process from Samsung. The Intel chip contains 100,000 million transistors on a 1280 mm² die with a density of 78.1 million per square millimeter. The Jetson's transistor count is unknown, and its die is 200 mm².

Clock speeds differ in memory only, since the Jetson lists no base or boost clock for the GPU core. The Intel card has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1550 MHz. Memory clocks are 600 MHz with 1200 Mbps effective for the Intel card, and 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective for the Jetson.

Memory configuration diverges completely: 48 GB of HBM2e on an 8192-bit bus versus 8 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. Shader resources show 7168 shading units, 448 TMUs, and 0 ROPs for Intel, versus 1024 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs for NVIDIA. The Intel card has 56 ray tracing cores; the Jetson has 32 tensor cores. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for Intel and 16.32 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate is 694.4 GTexel/s for Intel and 32.64 GTexel/s for NVIDIA.

Form factor and power differ sharply. The Intel card is dual-slot, 267 mm long, with a 300 W TDP, a single 12-pin power connector, and a 700 W suggested PSU. The Jetson is an IGP measuring 70 mm by 45 mm, with a 25 W TDP, no power connector, and no suggested PSU. The Intel card uses PCIe 5.0 x16; the Jetson uses PCIe 4.0 x4. Display outputs are absent on the Intel card, while the Jetson lists "Portable Device Dependent" outputs.

API support shows the Intel card with DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, and no Vulkan version. The Jetson supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Release dates are January 9, 2023, for the Intel part and December 16, 2024, for the Jetson. The Intel card has a successor listed as H3C Graphics, while the Jetson has no successor. The Jetson has a launch MSRP of 249 USD, while the Intel card has no recorded launch MSRP. Both parts are listed as Active in production status, and both sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database.