NVIDIA B200 SXM6 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q Comparison

NVIDIA B200 SXM6 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q occupy separate corners of the GPU spectrum. The B200 SXM6 is a server accelerator built on the Blackwell architecture, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q is a mobile graphics processor from the Ada Lovelace generation. The database shows no direct benchmark scores for either part, and no head-to-head measurement results are recorded. Their percentile ranks against all GPUs are identical at 50, and their average benchmark scores are both zero. The comparison below is therefore based entirely on the architectural and specification records in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shader units?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q has 7,424. The difference is 11,520 units, a substantial lead for the server part.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The B200 SXM6 contains 180 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus. The RTX 4080 Max-Q contains 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus. Memory bandwidth is 8.19 TB/s for the B200 and 432.0 GB/s for the RTX 4080 Max-Q.

Q: What is the power consumption of each?

A: The B200 SXM6 has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has a TDP of 60 W and no suggested PSU listed. The mobile part draws far less power.

Q: What architectures do they use?

A: The B200 SXM6 uses the Blackwell architecture with the GB100 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm TSMC process. The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD104 chip, also on a 5 nm TSMC process.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: No. The RTX 4080 Max-Q supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The B200 SXM6 has no API support listed: DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan are all marked N/A.

Q: What is the release date of each?

A: The RTX 4080 Max-Q was released on January 2, 2023. The B200 SXM6 was released on October 31, 2024.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different NVIDIA families. The B200 SXM6 is built on the Blackwell architecture, specifically the GB100 chip, and belongs to the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation. The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD104 chip and sits in the GeForce 40 Mobile generation. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 5 nm process, but the transistor counts differ sharply. The B200 integrates 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 127.8M per mm². The RTX 4080 Max-Q has 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a density of 121.8M per mm².

The B200 has no ray tracing cores listed, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q has 58 RT cores. Tensor core counts also differ: 592 for the B200 versus 232 for the RTX 4080 Max-Q. Texture mapping units number 592 on the B200 and 232 on the RTX 4080 Max-Q. Raster operation units are a separate story: the B200 has only 24 ROPs, whereas the RTX 4080 Max-Q has 80.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The B200 uses HBM3e with 180 GB capacity, 8192-bit bus width, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses GDDR6 with 12 GB capacity, 192-bit bus width, and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The B200 also supports PCIe 6.0 x16, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are absent on the B200 (listed as "No outputs"), whereas the RTX 4080 Max-Q's outputs are "Portable Device Dependent". API support also separates them: the B200 has no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support recorded, but the RTX 4080 Max-Q supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Clock behavior is unusual for the B200. Its base clock is 120 MHz and boost clock is 1830 MHz. The RTX 4080 Max-Q runs at a 795 MHz base and 1350 MHz boost. Memory clocks differ as well: the B200 runs at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective speed, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective. The B200's base clock is far lower, but its boost clock is higher than the mobile part's.

Where Each One Wins

The B200 SXM6 is designed for compute-heavy workloads. Its massive memory capacity (180 GB), wide 8192-bit bus, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth suit large data sets and high-throughput processing. The 592 tensor cores and 18,944 shaders provide raw compute density. With a 1000 W TDP and SXM module slot width, it is a rack-mounted accelerator with no display outputs. The API list being empty confirms it targets server environments where graphics APIs are irrelevant.

The RTX 4080 Max-Q wins on efficiency and portability. Its 60 W TDP allows integration into laptops. It has 80 ROPs, which is more than triple the B200's 24, so it handles traditional rasterization output better. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has ray tracing cores (58) and full API support for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. It uses a standard PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and operates as an IGP (integrated graphics processor). The 12 GB GDDR6 memory is sufficient for mobile gaming and content creation.

The B200 leads in raw specs: more shaders, more TMUs, more tensor cores, more memory, wider bus, higher bandwidth, larger die, and more transistors. The RTX 4080 Max-Q leads in pixel throughput: 108.0 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s for the B200. The B200 has higher texture rate (1,083.4 GTexel/s) versus 313.2 GTexel/s for the mobile part. FP32 compute is also in the B200's favor: 69.34 TFLOPS versus 20.04 TFLOPS.

Specification Differences

The key differences in specifications are listed below.

• Chip: GB100 (B200) versus AD104 (RTX 4080 Max-Q)
• Architecture: Blackwell versus Ada Lovelace
• Generation: Server Blackwell (Bxx) versus GeForce 40 Mobile
• Transistors: 208,000 million versus 35,800 million
• Die size: 1628 mm² versus 294 mm²
• Transistor density: 127.8M / mm² versus 121.8M / mm²
• Base clock: 120 MHz versus 795 MHz
• Boost clock: 1830 MHz versus 1350 MHz
• Memory clock: 2000 MHz, 8 Gbps effective versus 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective
• Memory size: 180 GB versus 12 GB
• Memory type: HBM3e versus GDDR6
• Memory bus: 8192 bit versus 192 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 8.19 TB/s versus 432.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 18,944 versus 7,424
• TMUs: 592 versus 232
• ROPs: 24 versus 80
• RT cores: none listed versus 58
• Tensor cores: 592 versus 232
• Pixel rate: 43.92 GPixel/s versus 108.0 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 1,083.4 GTexel/s versus 313.2 GTexel/s
• FP32: 69.34 TFLOPS versus 20.04 TFLOPS
• FP16: 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 20.04 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 1000 W versus 60 W
• Slot width: SXM Module versus IGP
• Power connectors: none listed versus none
• Suggested PSU: 1400 W versus none
• Bus interface: PCIe 6.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display outputs: No outputs versus Portable Device Dependent
• DirectX support: N/A versus 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• OpenGL support: N/A versus 4.6
• Vulkan support: N/A versus 1.4
• Release date: October 31, 2024 versus January 2, 2023
• Predecessor: Server Hopper versus GeForce 30 Mobile
• Successor: Server Rubin versus GeForce 50 Mobile
• Launch MSRP: 34,999 USD for the B200, none recorded for the RTX 4080 Max-Q

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No head-to-head benchmark results exist in the database. The wins counter shows zero for both parts, and the head-to-head benchmark list is empty. The average benchmark score for each is zero, and both sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs. The absence of recorded measurements means there are no score comparisons, no delta percentages, and no benchmark-derived conclusions.

The closest the database gets to performance data is the raw specification-derived rates. The B200's FP32 compute of 69.34 TFLOPS is 3.46 times the RTX 4080 Max-Q's 20.04 TFLOPS. Texture rate for the B200 (1,083.4 GTexel/s) is 3.46 times the mobile part's 313.2 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth is 18.96 times higher on the B200: 8.19 TB/s versus 432.0 GB/s. The B200 also has 2.55 times the shading units (18,944 versus 7,424) and 2.55 times the tensor cores (592 versus 232).

The RTX 4080 Max-Q wins on pixel rate: 108.0 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s, a 2.46 times advantage. It also has 3.33 times the ROPs (80 versus 24). The mobile part's boost clock is lower (1350 MHz versus 1830 MHz), but its base clock is much higher (795 MHz versus 120 MHz). The RTX 4080 Max-Q also has ray tracing cores (58) whereas the B200 lists none.

The Verdict

The database paints a clear picture. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is a server accelerator with extreme compute resources: 180 GB HBM3e, 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, 69.34 TFLOPS FP32, and 592 tensor cores. Its 1000 W TDP, SXM module form factor, and lack of display outputs or graphics API support place it firmly in data center roles. It has no ray tracing cores and a low pixel rate (43.92 GPixel/s) compared to the mobile part.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q is a mobile GPU with 60 W TDP, 12 GB GDDR6, 58 RT cores, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. Its 80 ROPs and 108.0 GPixel/s pixel rate indicate stronger rasterization output capability. The 1350 MHz boost clock is lower than the B200's 1830 MHz, but the mobile part starts at a much higher 795 MHz base.

The B200 SXM6 is the choice for compute-heavy server workloads. The data shows no graphics API support, no display outputs, and a 34,999 USD launch MSRP. It is designed for throughput, not rendering. The RTX 4080 Max-Q is suited for mobile systems where power efficiency and graphics feature support matter. Its 60 W TDP allows battery-powered operation, and its API compatibility enables standard graphics workloads.

Neither part has recorded benchmark scores, so the verdict rests on specifications alone. The B200 leads decisively in memory capacity, bandwidth, shader count, tensor cores, texture rate, and FP32 compute. The RTX 4080 Max-Q leads in pixel rate, ROP count, base clock, API support, and power efficiency. The two targets are different: one is a rack-mounted compute engine, the other is an integrated mobile graphics solution. Users needing server-scale processing should select the B200 SXM6. Users needing a portable GPU with graphics API support should select the RTX 4080 Max-Q.