Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 vs NVIDIA N1X 48SM Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows a clear split between these two accelerators, not by benchmark victories, but by workload orientation. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 is built as a discrete compute accelerator with a massive memory subsystem and high FP32 throughput, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a different memory architecture and a focus on lower power integration.

The Intel part carries 14,336 shading units, 896 texture mapping units, and 112 ray tracing cores. Its FP32 compute reaches 44.44 TFLOPS, and its FP16 throughput matches at 44.44 TFLOPS (1:1). The NVIDIA part has 6,144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 48 ray tracing cores, and 192 tensor cores, with FP32 and FP16 both at 28.83 TFLOPS (1:1). The Intel GPU delivers 1,388.8 GTexel/s texture rate versus 900.9 GTexel/s for the NVIDIA part, and the Intel pixel rate is recorded as 0 MPixel/s while the NVIDIA part reaches 112.6 GPixel/s.

For memory-centric workloads, the Intel accelerator holds the advantage. It uses 96 GB of HBM2e across an 8,192-bit bus, yielding 2.46 TB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA IGP uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, producing 273.2 GB/s. That is a roughly 9x bandwidth gap in favor of Intel when comparing the raw figures. The Intel card is a PCIe 5.0 x16 OAM module with a 450 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 850 W. The NVIDIA part is an IGP with no power connectors and no suggested PSU listed, also using PCIe 5.0 x16.

The use-case split becomes obvious: the Intel Max 1350 targets high-throughput compute, large model residency, and bandwidth-hungry workloads. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM targets integrated deployment, display output, and efficiency-oriented configurations. Neither part shows benchmark scores in the database, and both sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 0.

Architecture Differences

The two parts come from different foundries and process nodes. Intel uses a 10 nm process with its own foundry, while NVIDIA uses a 5 nm process from TSMC. The Intel chip, codenamed Ponte Vecchio, measures 1,280 mm² and packs 100,000 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 78.1M per mm². The NVIDIA chip, codenamed GB20B, measures 382 mm² with transistor count listed as unknown.

Architecture generations differ sharply. Intel runs Generation 12.5, while NVIDIA runs Blackwell 2.0. The Intel generation is labeled "Data Center GPU (Ponte Vecchio)" and the NVIDIA generation is "Blackwell IGP (N1x)". The Intel part has no display outputs, while the NVIDIA part has one HDMI output. The NVIDIA IGP supports no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan APIs per the database, while the Intel card supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, with Vulkan listed as null.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The Intel base clock is 750 MHz with a boost of 1,550 MHz. The NVIDIA base clock is 741 MHz with a boost of 2,346 MHz. Memory clocks also differ: Intel runs at 1,200 MHz with 2.4 Gbps effective, while NVIDIA runs at 1,067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective. The NVIDIA boost clock is 51% higher than Intel's boost clock, which reflects the different design goals of an IGP versus a discrete accelerator.

The Intel card is an OAM Module with no power connectors and a 450 W TDP. The NVIDIA part is an IGP with no power connectors and unknown TDP. The Intel part has a successor listed as "H3C Graphics", while the NVIDIA part has no successor. Release dates differ: Intel launched on 2023-01-09, NVIDIA on 2026-05-31.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark entries for these two parts. The wins count for each is zero. Both parts have an average benchmark score of 0 and sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs. Without measured benchmark data, the analysis relies on specification comparisons.

The largest quantitative gaps appear in memory bandwidth, texture rate, and FP32 compute. Intel delivers 2.46 TB/s versus NVIDIA's 273.2 GB/s, a difference that favors Intel by a factor of roughly nine. Intel's texture rate of 1,388.8 GTexel/s is 54% higher than NVIDIA's 900.9 GTexel/s. Intel's FP32 of 44.44 TFLOPS is 54% higher than NVIDIA's 28.83 TFLOPS. FP16 follows the same ratio, since both parts run FP16 at 1:1 with FP32.

The NVIDIA part wins on pixel rate. It records 112.6 GPixel/s, while Intel records 0 MPixel/s. The NVIDIA part also wins on boost clock, 2,346 MHz versus 1,550 MHz, and on memory capacity, 128 GB versus 96 GB. The NVIDIA part has tensor cores (192) while Intel lists tensor cores as null. The NVIDIA part has ROPs (48) while Intel lists 0.

The Intel part wins on memory bus width (8,192 bit versus 256 bit), shading units (14,336 versus 6,144), TMUs (896 versus 384), and ray tracing cores (112 versus 48). The Intel part also has a higher base clock (750 MHz versus 741 MHz), though the margin is small.

The pattern in the recorded data is one of complementary strengths. Intel dominates in raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth, while NVIDIA dominates in pixel throughput, boost clock, and integrated feature set. Neither part has measured benchmark results to confirm real-world performance, so specification deltas define the comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which part has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 reaches 44.44 TFLOPS FP32, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM reaches 28.83 TFLOPS. Intel is 54% higher.

Q: How do memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: Intel uses 96 GB of HBM2e on an 8,192-bit bus for 2.46 TB/s. NVIDIA uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus for 273.2 GB/s. Intel's bandwidth is roughly nine times higher.

Q: Which part has a higher boost clock?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM boosts to 2,346 MHz, while the Intel Max 1350 boosts to 1,550 MHz. The NVIDIA part is 51% higher.

Q: Does either part support display output?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has one HDMI output. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 has no display outputs.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: Intel uses a 10 nm process at its own foundry. NVIDIA uses a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Q: Which part has more ray tracing cores?

A: The Intel Max 1350 has 112 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has 48 ray tracing cores.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 | NVIDIA N1X 48SM |

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

| Manufacturer | Intel | NVIDIA |

| Chip | Ponte Vecchio | GB20B |

| Architecture | Generation 12.5 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 1,280 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistors | 100,000 million | unknown |

| Base Clock | 750 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1,550 MHz | 2,346 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1,200 MHz, 2.4 Gbps effective | 1,067 MHz, 8.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 96 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2e | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 8,192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 2.46 TB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 14,336 | 6,144 |

| TMUs | 896 | 384 |

| ROPs | 0 | 48 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 112 | 48 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 192 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 112.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,388.8 GTexel/s | 900.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 44.44 TFLOPS | 28.83 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 44.44 TFLOPS (1:1) | 28.83 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 450 W | unknown |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Power Connectors | null | None |

| Suggested PSU | 850 W | null |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | N/A |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | null | N/A |

| Release Date | 2023-01-09 | 2026-05-31 |

| Successor | H3C Graphics | null |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 50 | 50 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 0 |