AMD Radeon RX 7700 vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits these two accelerators into entirely different performance domains. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 has a full set of nine benchmark scores, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has no recorded benchmark entries in the database. This means the RX 7700 wins every measured comparison by default, but the practical interpretation is not that AMD is faster, rather that the database contains no direct numerical results for the B200.

The RX 7700 posts an average benchmark score of 15,852. Its best single result is a Passmark G3D score of 20,974, followed by a Geekbench OpenCL score of 106,028. The GPU compute result of 10,963 and the DirectX 11 score of 186 round out the strongest measured areas. The B200, by contrast, has an average score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50, meaning the database treats it as unmeasured for synthetic graphics workloads.

Percentile data reinforces the split. The RX 7700 sits at the 58th percentile among all GPUs, while the B200 sits at the 50th percentile. The B200’s 50th percentile with no scores is a neutral placeholder, not a performance statement. The RX 7700’s nearest rivals show how tightly it clusters in the mid-range: it is 1.1% above the AMD Radeon Pro W5500, 0.1% above the AMD Radeon R9 370X, 1% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060, and 1.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti. These delta values place the RX 7700 in a narrow competitive band rather than at the top of any class.

The B200 wins only in categories that are not represented in the benchmark suite. It carries more memory, a wider memory bus, a larger die, and a far higher transistor count, but none of these translate into a database score. The head-to-head benchmark table is empty, and the win counts are zero for both parts. The RX 7700 therefore owns every measured benchmark, while the B200 owns the unmeasured hardware specifications.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 uses the Navi 32 die with RDNA 3.0 architecture, part of the Navi III (RX 7000) generation. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 die with Blackwell architecture, part of the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation. Both are built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the similarity ends there.

Transistor and die data show the scale gap. The RX 7700 packs 28,100 million transistors into a 346 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. The B200 integrates 208,000 million transistors into a 1,628 mm² die, for a density of 127.8 million per square millimeter. The B200 has roughly 7.4 times the transistor count and about 4.7 times the die area.

Clock behavior differs sharply. The RX 7700 runs a base clock of 1900 MHz, a boost clock of 2459 MHz, and a game clock of 2041 MHz. The B200 runs a base clock of only 120 MHz and a boost clock of 1830 MHz. The low base clock reflects a server part designed for sustained throughput rather than burst responsiveness. Memory clocks follow the same pattern: the RX 7700 uses 2438 MHz with 19.5 Gbps effective, while the B200 uses 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective.

Memory configuration is where the B200 moves into a different class. The RX 7700 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The B200 has 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s, roughly 13.1 times the bandwidth. The bus width difference is 32-fold, which explains why the B200 achieves such high bandwidth despite lower memory clocks.

Compute unit counts also separate the two. The RX 7700 has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 96 ROPs, and 40 ray tracing cores. The B200 has 18,944 shading units, 592 texture mapping units, 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores. The B200 does not list ray tracing cores in the database, while the RX 7700 does not list tensor cores. The B200’s low ROP count of 24, against the RX 7700’s 96, is notable for a chip with such high shading and texture throughput.

Rates and compute figures reflect these counts. The RX 7700 reaches a pixel rate of 236.1 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 393.4 GTexel/s, with FP32 and FP16 both at 25.18 TFLOPS. The B200 reaches a pixel rate of 43.92 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 1,083.4 GTexel/s, with FP32 and FP16 both at 69.34 TFLOPS. The B200 leads in texture rate and FP32/FP16, while the RX 7700 leads in pixel rate by a wide margin.

Power and physical design diverge as expected. The RX 7700 has a TDP of 200 W, uses dual-slot cooling, two 8-pin power connectors, and a recommended 550 W power supply. It measures 267 mm in length, 135 mm in height, and 50 mm in width, with outputs including 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, and 1x USB Type-C. The B200 has a TDP of 1000 W, uses an SXM module form factor, and recommends a 1400 W power supply. It lists no display outputs and no dimensions in the database.

Interface and API support also differ. The RX 7700 uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The B200 uses PCIe 6.0 x16 and lists no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan. Release timing shows the B200 arrived earlier, on 2024-10-31, while the RX 7700 launched on 2025-09-17. The B200’s predecessor is listed as Server Hopper and its successor as Server Rubin, while the RX 7700’s predecessor is Navi II and successor is Navi IV.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear division. For any workload represented in the benchmark database, the AMD Radeon RX 7700 is the only part with measured results. Its 58th percentile rank, average score of 15,852, and strong DirectX and OpenCL numbers make it a functional choice for graphics and compute tasks that use standard APIs. The nearest rival data shows it sits within 1.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti and within 1.1% of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500, placing it in a familiar mid-range performance envelope.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 cannot be assessed on the same terms. With zero benchmark scores, an average score of 0, and no rival comparisons, the database provides no measured evidence of its graphics performance. Its value lies in specifications: 180 GB of HBM3e, 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32, and 592 tensor cores. Those numbers point to a server accelerator aimed at memory-heavy and tensor-heavy workloads, not at the DirectX and OpenGL tests that populate the RX 7700’s record.

The RX 7700 is the pick for anyone working with the measured benchmarks: DirectX 9 through 12, OpenCL, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute. The B200 is the pick for workloads that need massive memory capacity and bandwidth, and for tensor operations, based on its specification sheet. The RX 7700 also wins on power efficiency in practical terms, since the database lists it at 200 W against the B200’s 1000 W, but no efficiency metric is recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 has an average benchmark score of 15,852, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has an average score of 0 because no benchmarks are recorded for it.

Q: How does the RX 7700 compare to its nearest rival, the RTX 3060 Ti?

A: The RX 7700 trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti by 1.7% in average score, with scores of 15,852 and 16,129 respectively.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RX 7700 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth. The B200 has 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The B200 has 18,944 shading units, while the RX 7700 has 2,560 shading units.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU?

A: The RX 7700 has a TDP of 200 W with a suggested PSU of 550 W. The B200 has a TDP of 1000 W with a suggested PSU of 1400 W.

Q: Does the B200 support DirectX?

A: The database lists DirectX as N/A for the B200. The RX 7700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table is empty, so no direct side-by-side scores exist. The closest comparison available is the RX 7700’s own benchmark suite, since the B200 has no entries. The RX 7700’s largest wins are internal to its own score distribution, not cross-GPU, but they establish its strengths.

The Passmark G3D score of 20,974 is the RX 7700’s highest measured result. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 106,028 shows strong compute throughput under OpenCL. The Passmark GPU compute score of 10,963 confirms that compute performance is substantial relative to its graphics scores. The DirectX 11 score of 186 and DirectX 12 score of 96 show that newer API workloads score lower than legacy DirectX 9, which posts 261. The G2D score of 1,206 and DirectX 10 score of 92 complete the picture.

Against its nearest rivals, the RX 7700 shows narrow margins. It is 0.1% below the AMD Radeon R9 370X, which has an average score of 15,862. It is 1% below the AMD Radeon RX 9060, which scores 16,014. It is 1.1% above the AMD Radeon Pro W5500, which scores 15,679. It is 1.7% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which scores 16,129. The largest delta in either direction is the 1.7% gap to the RTX 3060 Ti, meaning the RX 7700’s closest competition outpaces it by less than two percent.

The B200’s absence from the benchmark table means its only comparable figures are hardware specifications. Its FP32 of 69.34 TFLOPS is 2.75 times the RX 7700’s 25.18 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 1,083.4 GTexel/s is 2.75 times the RX 7700’s 393.4 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 43.92 GPixel/s is far below the RX 7700’s 236.1 GPixel/s. These numbers indicate a rasterization-oriented advantage for the RX 7700 and a compute-oriented advantage for the B200, but without recorded benchmarks, the B200’s real-world standing remains unquantified in the database.