NVIDIA B200 SXM6 vs NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core specifications of the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 and B300 SXM6 AC?

A: Both cards use a 5 nm process at TSMC, have 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, and feature 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores. The B200 SXM6 is based on the GB100 chip with Blackwell architecture, while the B300 SXM6 AC uses the GB110 chip with Blackwell Ultra architecture.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare between the two cards?

A: The B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e memory, while the B300 SXM6 AC has 288 GB. Both use an 8192-bit bus width and deliver 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is identical at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective).

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The B200 SXM6 has a base clock of 120 MHz and a boost clock of 1830 MHz. The B300 SXM6 AC operates at a base clock of 1665 MHz and boosts to 2032 MHz. This results in significantly higher sustained performance for the B300.

Q: How do the power requirements differ?

A: The B200 SXM6 has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The B300 SXM6 AC has a TDP of 1100 W and a suggested PSU of 1500 W. Both are SXM modules with no display outputs.

Q: What benchmark data is available for these cards?

A: The B300 SXM6 AC has a recorded Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831, placing it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs. The B200 SXM6 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so its percentile is listed at 50 with an average score of 0.

Q: What are the release dates and predecessor/successor relationships?

A: The B200 SXM6 was released on October 31, 2024, and the B300 SXM6 AC was released on September 10, 2025. Both list Server Hopper as their predecessor and Server Rubin as their successor in the database.

The Verdict

The recorded data in the database indicates a clear performance hierarchy between these two accelerators. The B300 SXM6 AC delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831, which places it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database. This score is 7% higher than the nearest rival, the NVIDIA B200, which has an average score of 345,482 in the same test.

The B200 SXM6 has no recorded benchmark data in the database. The percentile field for the B200 is listed at 50, which appears to be a default value rather than a measured performance ranking. Without direct benchmark results, the B200's position cannot be quantitatively established from the database. The B300's 100th percentile ranking, however, confirms it sits at the top of the recorded GPU performance distribution.

For users requiring the highest recorded compute throughput, the B300 SXM6 AC is the only choice supported by measured data. Its 76.99 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 288 GB memory capacity also exceed the B200's specifications on paper. The B200 remains a capable accelerator with a lower TDP of 1000 W versus 1100 W, which could factor into system-level power design, but the database contains no performance measurements to support a performance-based selection of the B200.

The B300 SXM6 AC also demonstrates clear advantages over other recorded rivals. It outperforms the NVIDIA H200 NVL by 10.4%, the AMD Instinct MI300X by 16.3%, and the NVIDIA L40S by 25% in Geekbench OpenCL. These margins establish the B300 as the top-performing accelerator in the database's recorded results.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records one benchmark for the B300 SXM6 AC: Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 369,831. The B200 SXM6 has no recorded benchmarks, meaning no direct head-to-head comparison can be made from measured data.

The nearest rival data provides context for the B300's performance. The NVIDIA B200, which shares the same physical die size and transistor count as the B300, scores 345,482 in the same test. This yields a delta of 7% in favor of the B300. The performance gap likely stems from the B300's higher clock speeds, as both cards share identical memory bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s and the same 8192-bit bus width.

The B300's advantage over the H200 NVL is 10.4%, with the H200 scoring 334,891. Against the AMD Instinct MI300X at 317,994, the B300 holds a 16.3% lead. The largest recorded margin is against the NVIDIA L40S, which scores 295,763, a 25% difference.

The compute throughput numbers in the specification data align with these benchmark margins. The B300 delivers 76.99 TFLOPS FP32, while the B200 is listed at 69.34 TFLOPS FP32. This is an 11% increase in theoretical peak performance. The B300 also reaches 76.99 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio, matching its FP32 output, while the B200 also maintains a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio at 69.34 TFLOPS.

Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. The B300 achieves 48.77 GPixel/s and 1,202.9 GTexel/s, while the B200 manages 43.92 GPixel/s and 1,083.4 GTexel/s. The B300 leads by roughly 11% in both metrics, consistent with its clock advantage.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several specification fields. The chip designations are different: the B200 uses the GB100 chip, while the B300 uses the GB110. The architecture names also differ, with the B200 listed as Blackwell and the B300 as Blackwell Ultra. Both belong to the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation.

Clock speeds show substantial differences. The B200 has a base clock of 120 MHz and a boost clock of 1830 MHz. The B300 has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost clock of 2032 MHz. The base clock difference is particularly large, with the B300 running at over 13 times the B200's base frequency. The boost clock difference is more modest, with the B300 boosting 11% higher.

Memory capacity differs significantly. The B200 includes 180 GB of HBM3e memory, while the B300 includes 288 GB. This represents a 60% increase in memory capacity for the B300. Memory type, bus width, and bandwidth remain identical: HBM3e, 8192 bit, and 8.19 TB/s respectively.

Power specifications also differ. The B200 has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The B300 has a TDP of 1100 W and a suggested PSU of 1500 W. The B300 requires 100 W more TDP and 100 W more suggested PSU capacity.

Compute rates differ across all metrics. The B200 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16, 43.92 GPixel/s, and 1,083.4 GTexel/s. The B300 delivers 76.99 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16, 48.77 GPixel/s, and 1,202.9 GTexel/s. The B300 leads by approximately 11% across all these rates.

The release dates differ, with the B200 released on October 31, 2024, and the B300 released on September 10, 2025. The B200 has a recorded launch MSRP of 34,999 USD, while the B300 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the same 5 nm manufacturing process at TSMC, with 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die. The transistor density is identical at 127.8M per mm². The shader configuration is also identical: 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores. Neither card has ray tracing cores listed, and both have no display outputs.

The architectural distinction lies in the chip and architecture naming. The B200 uses the GB100 chip with Blackwell architecture. The B300 uses the GB110 chip with Blackwell Ultra architecture. The "Ultra" designation indicates a refinement of the Blackwell design, primarily expressed through higher clock operation.

Neither card supports DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan APIs, as all are listed as N/A. This confirms both are compute-focused accelerators rather than graphics-oriented products. Both use a PCIe 6.0 x16 bus interface.

The memory clocks are identical at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective data rate. The memory subsystem, including HBM3e type, 8192-bit bus width, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, is unchanged between the two generations. The B300's memory capacity increase from 180 GB to 288 GB does not alter the bandwidth characteristics.

The production status for both cards is listed as Active. Both share the same predecessor (Server Hopper) and successor (Server Rubin) in the database lineage. The clock architecture is the primary differentiator in how the identical transistor budgets are utilized.

Where Each One Wins

The B300 SXM6 AC wins in every measured and specified performance category in the database. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831 places it in the 100th percentile, a position no other recorded GPU in the database achieves. The B200 has no recorded benchmarks, so no performance win can be attributed to it from measured data.

In compute throughput, the B300 leads with 76.99 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 versus the B200's 69.34 TFLOPS. The B300 also leads in pixel rate (48.77 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s) and texture rate (1,202.9 GTexel/s versus 1,083.4 GTexel/s). These advantages make the B300 the preferred choice for compute-heavy workloads such as large-scale AI training and inference, where the database shows it outperforming the nearest rival B200 by 7% and the H200 NVL by 10.4%.

Memory capacity is another clear win for the B300, with 288 GB versus 180 GB. This 108 GB difference allows larger models or datasets to reside on-card without spilling to host memory. For workloads with very large memory footprints, such as training frontier-scale language models, the B300's additional capacity is a decisive factor.

The B200's only advantages in the specification data are its lower TDP of 1000 W versus 1100 W, its lower suggested PSU of 1400 W versus 1500 W, and its recorded launch MSRP of 34,999 USD, which the B300 does not have recorded. The B200 also has an earlier release date of October 31, 2024, versus September 10, 2025 for the B300, which may matter for procurement timelines.

The B300's 100th percentile ranking indicates it outperforms all other GPUs with recorded scores in the database, not just its direct rivals. The benchmark margins over the H200 NVL, MI300X, and L40S confirm the B300's position at the top of the performance hierarchy. For any application where raw compute throughput, memory capacity, or benchmark performance is the primary selection criterion, the recorded data points exclusively to the B300 SXM6 AC.