NVIDIA B200 SXM6 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Comparison

NVIDIA B200 SXM6 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, one a 1000 W server module with 180 GB of HBM3e, the other a 130 W dual-slot consumer card with 8 GB of GDDR6. The database records no shared benchmark results between them, and their specification sheets reveal starkly different design goals. The B200 SXM6 targets compute density in scale-out environments, while the RTX 5050 targets rendering and rasterization at modest power. Their percentile placements reflect this: the RTX 5050 sits at the 66th percentile of all GPUs, while the B200 SXM6 sits at the 50th percentile with no recorded average benchmark score. The absence of overlapping benchmarks means comparisons rely on architectural and feature analysis rather than direct score deltas.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5050 wins in any scenario involving graphics output, as the B200 SXM6 has no display outputs. The RTX 5050 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the B200 SXM6 lists N/A for all three APIs. For gaming, content creation, or any workload that requires a framebuffer, the RTX 5050 is the only option between the two. Its pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s and texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s also exceed the B200 SXM6 in pixel throughput, suggesting faster fill-rate-limited operations. The RTX 5050 delivers 13.17 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 compute, which is low compared to the B200 SXM6, but it does so within a 130 W power envelope.

The B200 SXM6 wins in raw compute density and memory capacity. Its 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 is more than five times the RTX 5050’s 13.17 TFLOPS. Its 180 GB of HBM3e memory dwarfs the RTX 5050’s 8 GB of GDDR6, and its 8.19 TB/s memory bandwidth is over 25 times the RTX 5050’s 320.0 GB/s. The B200 SXM6 also has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 592 tensor cores, compared to the RTX 5050’s 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 80 tensor cores. For large-scale matrix operations, AI inference, or data-parallel workloads that fit in its memory footprint, the B200 SXM6 is substantially more capable.

The RTX 5050 wins on clock speeds. Its base clock of 2317 MHz and boost clock of 2572 MHz eclipse the B200 SXM6’s 120 MHz base and 1830 MHz boost. This explains why the RTX 5050 achieves a higher pixel rate despite having far fewer ROPs (32 vs 24). The RTX 5050 also has a higher memory clock at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective), though the B200 SXM6 compensates with an 8192-bit bus.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32, which is over five times the RTX 5050’s 13.17 TFLOPS.

Q: Can the B200 SXM6 output video to a display?

A: No, the B200 SXM6 has no display outputs, while the RTX 5050 includes 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

Q: How does memory capacity compare?

A: The B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e, while the RTX 5050 has 8 GB of GDDR6, a 22.5x difference in capacity.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The B200 SXM6 has a TDP of 1000 W with a suggested PSU of 1400 W, while the RTX 5050 has a TDP of 130 W with a suggested PSU of 300 W.

Q: Which GPU supports modern graphics APIs?

A: The RTX 5050 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The B200 SXM6 lists N/A for all three APIs.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 rank among all GPUs?

A: The RTX 5050 sits at the 66th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 21,035, while the B200 SXM6 sits at the 50th percentile with no recorded average benchmark score.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the B200 SXM6 and RTX 5050. The B200 SXM6 has no benchmarks recorded, and the RTX 5050’s scores come from consumer-oriented tests such as 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (2,502), Geekbench OpenCL (90,334), and Passmark G3D (17,326). These tests are irrelevant to the B200 SXM6’s intended server workload, and the B200 SXM6’s lack of display outputs makes most of them inapplicable.

The RTX 5050’s nearest rivals in the database are all consumer or mobile GPUs. It trails the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL by 0.6% (21,153 average score), trails the AMD Radeon HD 8970M by 1% (21,237), and trails the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile by 1.6% (21,379). It leads the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT by 1.6% (20,713). These deltas are small, placing the RTX 5050 in a tight performance cluster. The B200 SXM6 has no nearest rivals recorded, so no comparative percentile deltas exist for it.

The RTX 5050’s Passmark scores show a mixed profile: DirectX 11 scores 150, DirectX 12 scores 66, and DirectX 9 scores 186, while compute scores 9,184. The G2D score of 1,113 and G3D score of 17,326 indicate that the card performs better in 2D and general 3D workloads than in compute-heavy tasks relative to its peers. The B200 SXM6’s compute potential, based on its FP32 and FP16 figures, would likely dominate in compute benchmarks, but no such measurements exist in the database.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The B200 SXM6 uses a 5 nm process with 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, while the RTX 5050 uses the same 5 nm process but with 16,900 million transistors on a 149 mm² die. Transistor density favors the B200 SXM6 at 127.8 million per mm² versus 113.4 million per mm². The B200 SXM6 has a base clock of 120 MHz and boost of 1830 MHz, while the RTX 5050 has a base of 2317 MHz and boost of 2572 MHz.

Memory differs fundamentally: 180 GB HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus versus 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. Bandwidth is 8.19 TB/s versus 320.0 GB/s. The B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, while the RTX 5050 has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RTX 5050 adds 20 ray tracing cores, while the B200 SXM6 lists no RT cores. Tensor cores are 592 on the B200 SXM6 versus 80 on the RTX 5050.

The B200 SXM6 uses an SXM Module slot width with a 1000 W TDP and no power connectors listed, suggesting a board-level power delivery. The RTX 5050 is dual-slot with a 1x 8-pin power connector and a 130 W TDP. The B200 SXM6 uses PCIe 6.0 x16, while the RTX 5050 uses PCIe 5.0 x8. Display outputs are absent on the B200 SXM6, while the RTX 5050 has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. Release dates are October 31, 2024 for the B200 SXM6 and June 30, 2025 for the RTX 5050.

Architecture Differences

The B200 SXM6 is built on the Blackwell architecture and belongs to the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation, using the GB100 chip. The RTX 5050 uses Blackwell 2.0, a newer iteration, and belongs to the GeForce 50-series generation, using the GB207 chip. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process, but the B200 SXM6’s transistor count and die size are an order of magnitude larger. The B200 SXM6’s predecessor is Server Hopper and its successor is Server Rubin, while the RTX 5050’s predecessor is GeForce 40 and its successor is GeForce 60.

The B200 SXM6 has no ray tracing cores listed, while the RTX 5050 has 20. This suggests the RTX 5050 is optimized for real-time graphics with hardware-accelerated ray tracing, while the B200 SXM6 focuses on compute throughput. The B200 SXM6 supports PCIe 6.0 x16, a server-grade interface, while the RTX 5050 uses PCIe 5.0 x8, which is common for consumer cards. The B200 SXM6’s memory type, HBM3e, is stacked and designed for bandwidth, while the RTX 5050 uses GDDR6 for cost and latency characteristics.

The B200 SXM6 has no reported DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, reinforcing its role as a compute accelerator rather than a graphics card. The RTX 5050 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, aligning with consumer graphics expectations. The B200 SXM6’s pixel rate of 43.92 GPixel/s is lower than the RTX 5050’s 82.30 GPixel/s, which is unusual given the B200 SXM6’s larger compute resources but explained by its lower clocks and ROP count.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the B200 SXM6 is designed for compute-intensive server workloads where memory capacity, bandwidth, and FP32 throughput are paramount. Its 180 GB of HBM3e and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth exceed any consumer requirement, and its 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32 is unmatched by the RTX 5050’s 13.17 TFLOPS. The B200 SXM6 also has 592 tensor cores versus 80 on the RTX 5050, pointing to AI and matrix operations as primary use cases. Its lack of display outputs and graphics API support confirms that it is not intended for interactive rendering.

The RTX 5050 is the only choice for display-driven tasks. Its 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs, combined with DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, make it suitable for gaming and workstation graphics. Its 82.30 GPixel/s pixel rate and 20 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for modern rendering techniques. The RTX 5050’s 130 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU also allow deployment in standard desktop systems, unlike the B200 SXM6’s 1000 W TDP and 1400 W suggested PSU.

Benchmark data for the RTX 5050 shows a 66th percentile placement among all GPUs and an average score of 21,035, placing it among consumer cards like the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL and NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile. The B200 SXM6 has no benchmark scores recorded, so its percentile of 50 reflects missing data rather than measured performance. Users requiring high-throughput compute with massive memory should select the B200 SXM6. Users needing graphics output, API compatibility, or low power draw should select the RTX 5050. The two GPUs do not compete in any measured workload, and the recorded data does not support a direct comparison beyond their spec sheets.