NVIDIA A10M vs NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC wins the only head-to-head test in the database, the Geekbench OpenCL workload. The B300 SXM6 AC scores 369,831, while the NVIDIA A10M scores 135,230. That is a delta of 173.5%, meaning the B300 SXM6 AC more than doubles the A10M’s output in this compute-heavy test.

For the A10M, there are no recorded wins in any measured comparison. Its profile is defined by a much lower absolute score, but it sits in a different operational class. The A10M draws 150 W and occupies a single slot, while the B300 SXM6 AC draws 1100 W and requires an SXM module form factor. The data does not show any test where the A10M outperforms the B300 SXM6 AC; the gap is consistent and large across the one available metric.

The use-case split is therefore not about which card wins a given benchmark, but about which card is appropriate for which deployment scenario. The B300 SXM6 AC is built for maximum compute density in a server rack, with a 288 GB HBM3e memory pool and 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The A10M, with 20 GB of GDDR6 and 500.2 GB/s of bandwidth, is a far smaller memory and bandwidth envelope, suited to workloads that fit within those limits.

The benchmark data indicates that any task that scales with raw OpenCL compute throughput will favor the B300 SXM6 AC overwhelmingly. Tasks that are memory-bound or that require only moderate compute, such as inference on smaller models or non-AI server workloads, could still run on the A10M, but the data does not show any measurable advantage for the A10M in the recorded test.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators come from different generations of NVIDIA server hardware. The B300 SXM6 AC uses the GB110 chip, built on the Blackwell Ultra architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The A10M uses the GA102 chip, built on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The process node difference alone, 5 nm versus 8 nm, explains a substantial portion of the efficiency and density gap.

The B300 SXM6 AC packs 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 127.8 million per mm². The A10M has 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, for a density of 45.1 million per mm². The B300 SXM6 AC is nearly 11 times larger in transistor count and more than 2.5 times larger in die area, but its density is nearly three times higher. This is a direct consequence of the newer process node and architecture design.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The B300 SXM6 AC uses HBM3e with a 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth across 288 GB. The A10M uses GDDR6 with a 320-bit bus, delivering 500.2 GB/s across 20 GB. The B300 SXM6 AC has 16.4 times the memory bandwidth and 14.4 times the capacity. The memory clock on the B300 SXM6 AC is 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective), while the A10M runs at 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective), but the vastly wider bus on the B300 SXM6 AC dominates the comparison.

Compute resources also differ sharply. The B300 SXM6 AC has 18,944 shading units, 592 texture mapping units, 24 raster output units, and 592 tensor cores. The A10M has 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 56 ray tracing cores, and 224 tensor cores. The B300 SXM6 AC has 2.6 times the shading units and 2.6 times the tensor cores, but only 24 ROPs versus 80 ROPs on the A10M. Pixel rate tells the opposite story: the A10M achieves 130.8 GPixel/s, while the B300 SXM6 AC achieves 48.77 GPixel/s. Texture rate favors the B300 SXM6 AC at 1,202.9 GTexel/s versus 366.2 GTexel/s.

The B300 SXM6 AC supports PCIe 6.0 x16, while the A10M uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The B300 SXM6 AC has no display outputs and no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, reflecting its pure compute role. The A10M also has no display outputs but does support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, indicating a broader software compatibility profile.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is the superior compute accelerator. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831 places it at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the A10M sits at the 96th percentile with a score of 135,230. The B300 SXM6 AC is 173.5% faster than the A10M in the only head-to-head test available.

The B300 SXM6 AC also leads its nearest rivals. It is 7% ahead of the NVIDIA B200, 10.4% ahead of the NVIDIA H200 NVL, 16.3% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI300X, and 25% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S. The A10M, by contrast, is effectively tied with the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation (0% delta), slightly behind the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (-0.1%), further behind the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (-0.4%), and slightly behind the AMD Radeon PRO V620 (-0.9%).

Who should pick which? The data supports the B300 SXM6 AC for any deployment where maximum compute throughput, massive memory capacity, and extreme bandwidth are required. It is an active production part, released on September 10, 2025, and its predecessor is Server Hopper with a successor of Server Rubin. The A10M is end-of-life, with a predecessor of Tesla Turing and a successor of Server Ada. For new deployments, the B300 SXM6 AC is clearly the forward-looking choice.

The A10M remains relevant only in scenarios where its 150 W power draw and single-slot form factor are mandatory constraints. It is a legacy part, and the benchmark data shows it is not competitive with the B300 SXM6 AC on raw compute. The A10M’s closest rival, the RTX 4000 Ada Generation, scores 135,218, essentially identical, so the A10M is not even the leader in its own performance class.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC than the NVIDIA A10M in OpenCL?

A: The B300 SXM6 AC scores 369,831 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the A10M scores 135,230. The B300 SXM6 AC is 173.5% faster.

Q: What memory configurations do these two accelerators use?

A: The B300 SXM6 AC has 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The A10M has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus with 500.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate?

A: The A10M has a pixel rate of 130.8 GPixel/s, while the B300 SXM6 AC has a pixel rate of 48.77 GPixel/s. The A10M is higher in this specific rasterization metric.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The B300 SXM6 AC has a TDP of 1100 W, while the A10M has a TDP of 150 W. The suggested PSU is 1500 W for the B300 SXM6 AC and 450 W for the A10M.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the A10M wins?

A: In the recorded head-to-head data, the A10M has zero wins. The B300 SXM6 AC wins the only available test, Geekbench OpenCL.

Q: How does the B300 SXM6 AC compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is 7% ahead of the NVIDIA B200, 10.4% ahead of the NVIDIA H200 NVL, 16.3% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI300X, and 25% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The B300 SXM6 AC scores 369,831, and the A10M scores 135,230. The delta is 173.5%, which is the largest margin recorded in this comparison. To put that in context, the B300 SXM6 AC’s score is 2.7 times the A10M’s score.

The B300 SXM6 AC’s score of 369,831 places it at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA B200, scores 345,482, which is 7% lower. The NVIDIA H200 NVL scores 334,891, 10.4% lower. The AMD Instinct MI300X scores 317,994, 16.3% lower. The NVIDIA L40S scores 295,763, 25% lower. The B300 SXM6 AC leads its entire nearest-rival group by a clear margin.

The A10M’s score of 135,230 places it at the 96th percentile. Its nearest rivals are extremely close: the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation scores 135,218 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 scores 135,396 (-0.1% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo scores 135,774 (-0.4% delta), and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 scores 136,472 (-0.9% delta). The A10M is effectively in a dead heat with these cards, none of which are close to the B300 SXM6 AC.

The FP32 compute figures reinforce the OpenCL result. The B300 SXM6 AC delivers 76.99 TFLOPS of FP32 and 76.99 TFLOPS of FP16 (1:1). The A10M delivers 23.44 TFLOPS of FP32 and 23.44 TFLOPS of FP16 (1:1). The B300 SXM6 AC has 3.3 times the FP32 throughput. The texture rate also favors the B300 SXM6 AC at 1,202.9 GTexel/s versus 366.2 GTexel/s, a 3.3 times advantage. The only metric where the A10M leads is pixel rate, 130.8 GPixel/s versus 48.77 GPixel/s, and that is not represented in the OpenCL score.

Specification Differences

The two accelerators differ across nearly every recorded specification. The B300 SXM6 AC uses the GB110 chip on a 5 nm TSMC process, while the A10M uses the GA102 chip on an 8 nm Samsung process. Transistor counts are 208,000 million versus 28,300 million. Die size is 1628 mm² versus 628 mm². Transistor density is 127.8M per mm² versus 45.1M per mm².

Clock speeds differ: the B300 SXM6 AC has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost clock of 2032 MHz. The A10M has a base clock of 975 MHz and a boost clock of 1635 MHz. Memory clocks are 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) for the B300 SXM6 AC and 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective) for the A10M.

Memory capacity is 288 GB versus 20 GB. Memory type is HBM3e versus GDDR6. Bus width is 8192 bit versus 320 bit. Bandwidth is 8.19 TB/s versus 500.2 GB/s.

Compute units: the B300 SXM6 AC has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores. The A10M has 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 56 ray tracing cores, and 224 tensor cores. The B300 SXM6 AC has no ray tracing core count listed, while the A10M has 56.

Pixel rate is 48.77 GPixel/s for the B300 SXM6 AC and 130.8 GPixel/s for the A10M. Texture rate is 1,202.9 GTexel/s versus 366.2 GTexel/s. FP32 is 76.99 TFLOPS versus 23.44 TFLOPS. FP16 is 76.99 TFLOPS (1:1) for both, but the absolute values differ.

Power and form factor: the B300 SXM6 AC has a TDP of 1100 W, uses an SXM module slot, and has a suggested PSU of 1500 W. The A10M has a TDP of 150 W, is single-slot, uses an 8-pin EPS power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 450 W. The A10M measures 267 mm in length and 112 mm in height; the B300 SXM6 AC has no recorded dimensions.

Bus interface: the B300 SXM6 AC uses PCIe 6.0 x16, while the A10M uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are absent on both. API support differs: the B300 SXM6 AC has no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, while the A10M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Production status differs: the B300 SXM6 AC is active, released on September 10, 2025, while the A10M is end-of-life with no recorded release date. Predecessors are Server Hopper for the B300 SXM6 AC and Tesla Turing for the A10M. Successors are Server Rubin for the B300 SXM6 AC and Server Ada for the A10M.