NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB vs NVIDIA B200 Comparison

NVIDIA B200 vs NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB is a generational clash between Blackwell and Ampere server architectures. The benchmark data shows the B200 is 66.8% ahead in the single OpenCL test, placing it at the 100th percentile of all GPUs while the A100 sits at the 99th. The B200 uses a 5 nm process with 104,000 million transistors, whereas the A100 uses 7 nm with 54,200 million. Memory configurations differ sharply: 90 GB HBM3e on a 4096-bit bus versus 80 GB HBM2e on a 5120-bit bus. The B200 is a 1000 W SXM Module, while the A100 is a 300 W dual-slot PCIe card. This analysis breaks down where each wins, architectural differences, and what the numbers mean for real workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher raw compute throughput?

A: The B200 delivers 74.45 TFLOPS FP32 and 1,191.2 TFLOPS FP16 (16:1), compared to the A100's 19.49 TFLOPS FP32 and 77.97 TFLOPS FP16 (4:1). The B200 is 3.8x faster in FP32 and 15.3x faster in FP16 based on these figures.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The B200 has 90 GB HBM3e with 4.10 TB/s bandwidth on a 4096-bit bus. The A100 has 80 GB HBM2e with 1.94 TB/s bandwidth on a wider 5120-bit bus. Despite the narrower bus, the B200's newer memory type provides 2.1x the bandwidth.

Q: What is the performance gap in the available benchmark?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the B200 scores 345,482 against the A100's 207,124. This is a 66.8% advantage for the B200, which also holds a perfect 100th percentile ranking versus the A100's 99th.

Q: Which card has better nearest-rival positioning?

A: The B200 leads its closest rival, the NVIDIA H200 NVL, by 3.2%. The A100 trails the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D by 5.8% and the NVIDIA PG506-232 by 8%, while leading the RTX 6000D by 5.7%.

Q: Are there physical form factor differences?

A: Yes. The B200 is an SXM Module, while the A100 is a dual-slot PCIe card measuring 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height. The A100 uses an 8-pin EPS power connector; the B200's connector is not specified.

Q: What are the production statuses?

A: The B200 is Active, while the A100 is End-of-life. The A100 has a release date of 2021-06-27; the B200's release date is not provided.

Where Each One Wins

The B200 wins the only head-to-head benchmark, and its advantage is decisive. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 345,482 versus 207,124, a 66.8% margin. This is the sole comparative data point, so the B200 takes a clean sweep with 1 win against 0. Beyond the raw score, the B200's nearest rivals are all higher-tier: the H200 NVL at 334,891, the B300 SXM6 AC at 369,831, and the Instinct MI300X at 317,994. The A100's nearest rivals are lower-tier workstation and server cards like the RTX 6000D at 195,964 and the Tesla V100S at 194,415. This positioning suggests the B200 competes in a performance class well above the A100.

The A100's wins are not in performance but in efficiency and practicality. It consumes 300 W versus 1000 W, making it far less demanding on power delivery and cooling. Its dual-slot PCIe form factor with an 8-pin EPS connector is easier to integrate into existing servers than the B200's SXM Module. The A100 also has a wider 5120-bit memory bus and a larger die area at 826 mm², though these do not translate into benchmark wins. For workloads that fit within 80 GB and do not require the B200's extreme throughput, the A100's lower power envelope is a tangible advantage.

In terms of feature set, the B200 wins on memory capacity (90 GB vs 80 GB), memory type (HBM3e vs HBM2e), and bandwidth (4.10 TB/s vs 1.94 TB/s). It also has more shading units (18,944 vs 6,912), more TMUs (592 vs 432), and more tensor cores (592 vs 432). The A100 wins on pixel rate (225.6 GPixel/s vs 47.16 GPixel/s) and has more ROPs (160 vs 24). The A100's higher pixel rate is a legacy of its architecture, but the B200's texturing rate is nearly double (1,163.3 GTexel/s vs 609.1 GTexel/s). For compute-heavy tasks, the B200 dominates; for rasterization-oriented workloads, the A100's ROP advantage is notable but irrelevant for a server accelerator with no display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The B200 is built on the Blackwell architecture with the GB100 chip, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process. It packs 104,000 million transistors. The A100 uses the Ampere architecture with the GA100 chip, on a 7 nm process, with 54,200 million transistors. This nearly 2x transistor count difference is the core of the B200's performance lead. The B200's process node is smaller, allowing more transistors in a similar footprint, though die size data for the B200 is not provided. The A100's die size is 826 mm² with a transistor density of 65.6M per mm².

Memory architecture is a major split. The B200 uses HBM3e with a 4096-bit bus, achieving 4.10 TB/s bandwidth. The A100 uses HBM2e with a wider 5120-bit bus but only reaches 1.94 TB/s. The newer memory standard gives the B200 a 2.1x bandwidth advantage despite the narrower interface. The B200's memory clock is 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective), while the A100's is 1512 MHz (3 Gbps effective). This means the B200's memory operates at a higher frequency and transfers more data per pin.

Compute resources differ significantly. The B200 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 592 tensor cores. The A100 has 6,912 shading units, 432 TMUs, and 432 tensor cores. The B200's FP16 throughput is 1,191.2 TFLOPS with a 16:1 ratio, while the A100's is 77.97 TFLOPS with a 4:1 ratio. This indicates a different tensor core design—the B200's ratio suggests a much higher ratio of FP16 to FP32, likely optimized for AI workloads. The A100's 4:1 ratio is more conventional. Both lack RT cores and display outputs, and neither supports DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan APIs, confirming they are pure compute accelerators.

Clock speeds tell another story. The B200 has a lower base clock (700 MHz) but a much higher boost clock (1965 MHz) compared to the A100's 1065 MHz base and 1410 MHz boost. This wide boost range suggests aggressive power management. The B200's TDP is 1000 W with a suggested PSU of 1400 W, while the A100's TDP is 300 W with a 700 W suggested PSU. The B200's power draw is 3.3x higher, which is the price for its performance.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Architecture: Blackwell (B200) vs Ampere (A100)
• Chip: GB100 vs GA100
• Process Node: 5 nm vs 7 nm
• Transistors: 104,000 million vs 54,200 million
• Die Size: Not specified vs 826 mm²
• Transistor Density: Not specified vs 65.6M / mm²
• Base Clock: 700 MHz vs 1065 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1965 MHz vs 1410 MHz
• Memory Clock: 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) vs 1512 MHz (3 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: 90 GB vs 80 GB
• Memory Type: HBM3e vs HBM2e
• Memory Bus Width: 4096 bit vs 5120 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 4.10 TB/s vs 1.94 TB/s
• Shading Units: 18,944 vs 6,912
• TMUs: 592 vs 432
• ROPs: 24 vs 160
• Tensor Cores: 592 vs 432
• Pixel Rate: 47.16 GPixel/s vs 225.6 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 1,163.3 GTexel/s vs 609.1 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 74.45 TFLOPS vs 19.49 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 1,191.2 TFLOPS (16:1) vs 77.97 TFLOPS (4:1)
• TDP: 1000 W vs 300 W
• Slot Width: SXM Module vs Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: Not specified vs 8-pin EPS
• Suggested PSU: 1400 W vs 700 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 vs PCIe 4.0 x16
• Dimensions: Not specified vs 267 mm x 111 mm
• Production Status: Active vs End-of-life
• Release Date: Not specified vs 2021-06-27
• Predecessor: Server Hopper vs Tesla Turing
• Successor: Server Rubin vs Server Ada

Fields that are the same: manufacturer (NVIDIA), foundry (TSMC), no RT cores, no display outputs, no API support, and no launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison is Geekbench OpenCL. The B200 scores 345,482, and the A100 scores 207,124. The B200 wins with a 66.8% delta. To contextualize, the B200's score is 10.5% higher than its nearest rival, the H200 NVL at 334,891. The A100's score is 5.7% above the RTX 6000D at 195,964 but 5.8% below the Radeon PRO W7900D at 219,827 and 8% below the PG506-232 at 225,124. This means the A100 is not even the top performer in its own tier; it sits mid-pack. The B200, by contrast, is near the top of its tier, trailing only the B300 SXM6 AC by 6.6%.

Breaking down the compute figures explains the benchmark gap. The B200's FP32 throughput of 74.45 TFLOPS is 3.8x the A100's 19.49 TFLOPS. In FP16, the B200's 1,191.2 TFLOPS is 15.3x the A100's 77.97 TFLOPS. The B200's memory bandwidth of 4.10 TB/s is 2.1x the A100's 1.94 TB/s. These ratios align with the 66.8% OpenCL delta, suggesting the benchmark is compute-bound and memory-bandwidth-sensitive. The B200's texture rate of 1,163.3 GTexel/s is 1.9x the A100's 609.1 GTexel/s, another indicator of its raw throughput advantage.

The B200's shading unit count (18,944) is 2.7x the A100's (6,912). Its tensor core count (592) is 1.4x the A100's (432). These resource differences directly support the FP16 and FP32 deltas. The A100's only wins are pixel rate (225.6 GPixel/s vs 47.16 GPixel/s) and ROP count (160 vs 24). These metrics matter for graphics output, but since both cards have no display outputs, they are irrelevant for the target use case. In every compute-relevant metric, the B200 wins by a wide margin.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA B200 is the superior compute accelerator. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 66.8%, and its architectural specs—3.8x FP32, 15.3x FP16, 2.1x memory bandwidth—support a dominant position. Its 100th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with nearest rivals like the H200 NVL and B300 SXM6 AC, places it at the high-end of server hardware. Anyone needing maximum throughput for AI training, scientific simulation, or large-scale data processing should choose the B200. Its 90 GB HBM3e memory and 4.10 TB/s bandwidth are headroom for the largest models.

The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB is the pragmatic choice, but only under specific constraints. Its 300 W TDP and dual-slot PCIe form factor make it far easier to deploy in existing infrastructure. A 700 W suggested PSU versus 1400 W means lower operational demands. Its 99th percentile ranking is still excellent, and it competes well against workstation cards like the RTX 6000D. However, it trails the Radeon PRO W7900D by 5.8%, meaning it is not even the best in its class. The A100 is end-of-life, while the B200 is active. For new deployments, the B200's performance advantage justifies its higher power draw. For retrofits or power-constrained environments, the A100's lower footprint is a real benefit, but the data shows it is a legacy part.

Choose the B200 for performance without compromise. Choose the A100 only if power and form factor are non-negotiable, and even then, expect to be 66.8% slower in OpenCL workloads. The B200's nearest rival, the H200 NVL, is only 3.2% behind, so the B200 is not the absolute fastest—the B300 SXM6 AC leads it by 6.6%—but it is the best option in this direct comparison. The verdict is straightforward: the B200 wins on every compute metric, and the A100's only advantages are efficiency and integration ease.