NVIDIA B200 SXM6 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile. The B200 SXM6 has no recorded benchmark scores, while the RTX 5050 Mobile has two: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2365 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 84171. Its average benchmark score is 43268, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The B200 SXM6 sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of 0, indicating that no standardized gaming or compute workloads have been run on it. Consequently, any direct comparison must rely on architectural specifications and theoretical throughput figures rather than measured application performance.

The RTX 5050 Mobile's nearest rivals in the database show how its average score of 43268 positions it. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB scores 43262, a delta of 0%. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 scores 43301, a delta of -0.1% (meaning the RTX 5050 Mobile trails by a tenth of a percent). The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER scores 43223, a delta of 0.1% (the RTX 5050 Mobile leads by a tenth of a percent). The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile scores 43667, a delta of -0.9%, so the RTX 5050 Mobile is nearly one percent behind the flagship laptop GPU. These deltas are all within a single percentage point, indicating that the RTX 5050 Mobile delivers performance comparable to a wide range of desktop and mobile cards from previous generations.

For the B200 SXM6, the theoretical FP32 throughput is 69.34 TFLOPS, which is roughly nine times the RTX 5050 Mobile's 7.680 TFLOPS. The FP16 figures mirror this exactly: 69.34 TFLOPS for the B200 versus 7.680 TFLOPS for the RTX 5050 Mobile, with both running at a 1:1 ratio. Texture rate tells a similar story: the B200 delivers 1,083.4 GTexel/s against 120.0 GTexel/s for the RTX 5050 Mobile, an approximate nine-fold advantage. Pixel rate is the outlier: the B200 achieves 43.92 GPixel/s while the RTX 5050 Mobile achieves 48.00 GPixel/s, meaning the mobile part is actually about 9% faster in pixel throughput. This stems from the RTX 5050 Mobile having 32 ROPs versus only 24 on the B200, despite the B200's massive shading core count.

Where Each One Wins

The B200 SXM6 wins decisively in raw compute density and memory bandwidth. Its FP32 and FP16 throughput of 69.34 TFLOPS serve workloads that demand massive parallel processing, such as large-scale AI training, scientific simulation, and data-center inference. The 8.19 TB/s memory bandwidth, paired with 180 GB of HBM3e, provides a capacity and bandwidth combination that the RTX 5050 Mobile cannot approach. The RTX 5050 Mobile offers 384.0 GB/s across an 8 GB GDDR7 pool, which is 4.7% of the B200's bandwidth and 4.4% of its memory capacity. For any workload that fits within the B200's memory envelope, the bandwidth difference is overwhelming.

The RTX 5050 Mobile wins in pixel throughput, as noted above, and in API compatibility. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the B200 lists N/A for all three APIs. This means the RTX 5050 Mobile can run modern gaming and consumer graphics workloads, while the B200 has no display outputs and no consumer API support. The RTX 5050 Mobile is an IGP with portable-device-dependent display outputs, designed for laptops; the B200 is a SXM Module with no outputs, intended for servers. The RTX 5050 Mobile's 50 W TDP versus the B200's 1000 W TDP also indicates where each belongs: one in a battery-powered notebook, the other in a rack with substantial cooling and power delivery.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs use a 5 nm TSMC process, but they diverge sharply in scale and design intent. The B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip with the Blackwell architecture, while the RTX 5050 Mobile uses the GB207 chip with Blackwell 2.0. The B200 packs 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 127.8M per mm². The RTX 5050 Mobile has 16,900 million transistors on 149 mm², with a density of 113.4M per mm². The B200's die is nearly eleven times larger and carries over twelve times the transistor count.

Shading units reflect the same gap: the B200 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 592 tensor cores. The RTX 5050 Mobile has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, 80 tensor cores, and 20 RT cores. The B200's tensor core count of 592 is 7.4 times the RTX 5050 Mobile's 80, though the RTX 5050 Mobile adds dedicated RT cores for ray tracing, which the B200 does not list. The B200 has no RT core count in the database, reinforcing its server-focused role.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The B200 uses HBM3e across an 8192-bit bus, while the RTX 5050 Mobile uses GDDR7 across a 128-bit bus. The B200's memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective, versus 1500 MHz with 24 Gbps effective on the RTX 5050 Mobile. The bus width difference explains the bandwidth gap: 8192 bits versus 128 bits is a 64-fold difference, though the B200 only achieves roughly 21 times the bandwidth because of the GDDR7's higher effective speed per pin.

The bus interfaces also differ: the B200 uses PCIe 6.0 x16, while the RTX 5050 Mobile uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Both are current-generation interconnects, but the B200's newer standard aligns with its data-center positioning. Power delivery is another separator: the B200 requires a 1400 W suggested PSU and consumes 1000 W TDP, whereas the RTX 5050 Mobile has no power connectors and runs at 50 W TDP.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS, which is approximately nine times the RTX 5050 Mobile's 7.680 TFLOPS. The FP16 rates are identical to the FP32 rates for both, at a 1:1 ratio.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The B200 SXM6 has 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth across 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus. The RTX 5050 Mobile has 384.0 GB/s across 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus. The B200's bandwidth is about 21 times higher.

Q: Can the B200 SXM6 run DirectX or Vulkan applications?

A: No. The database lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A for the B200 SXM6. The RTX 5050 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The B200 SXM6 has 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die. The RTX 5050 Mobile has 16,900 million transistors on 149 mm². The B200 carries over twelve times the transistor count.

Q: Which GPU has higher pixel fill rate?

A: The RTX 5050 Mobile has a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s, slightly ahead of the B200 SXM6's 43.92 GPixel/s. This is due to the RTX 5050 Mobile having 32 ROPs versus 24 on the B200.

Q: What are their power requirements?

A: The B200 SXM6 has a 1000 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The RTX 5050 Mobile has a 50 W TDP and no power connectors listed.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable field. The B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip with Blackwell architecture, while the RTX 5050 Mobile uses GB207 with Blackwell 2.0. Process nodes match at 5 nm from TSMC, but die size diverges: 1628 mm² versus 149 mm². Transistor counts are 208,000 million versus 16,900 million. Base clocks are 120 MHz on the B200 versus 1020 MHz on the RTX 5050 Mobile; boost clocks are 1830 MHz versus 1500 MHz.

Memory differs completely: the B200 has 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth; the RTX 5050 Mobile has 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s. Shading units are 18,944 versus 2,560; TMUs are 592 versus 80; ROPs are 24 versus 32. Tensor cores are 592 versus 80, and the RTX 5050 Mobile adds 20 RT cores while the B200 lists none. Pixel rate favors the RTX 5050 Mobile at 48.00 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s. Texture rate favors the B200 at 1,083.4 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 are 69.34 TFLOPS versus 7.680 TFLOPS for both.

TDP is 1000 W versus 50 W. The B200 is a SXM Module with no display outputs; the RTX 5050 Mobile is an IGP with portable-device-dependent outputs. The B200 uses PCIe 6.0 x16; the RTX 5050 Mobile uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The B200 has no API support listed; the RTX 5050 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The B200 launched on 2024-10-31 with a launch MSRP of 34,999 USD; the RTX 5050 Mobile launched on 2025-06-23 with no listed MSRP. The B200's predecessor is Server Hopper and successor is Server Rubin; the RTX 5050 Mobile's predecessor is GeForce 40 Mobile with no successor listed.

The Verdict

The data indicates two entirely different products that share a manufacturer and a process node. The B200 SXM6 is a server accelerator with massive compute resources: 18,944 shading units, 592 tensor cores, 180 GB of HBM3e, and 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. It has no display outputs, no consumer API support, and requires a 1400 W PSU. Its 50th percentile ranking with zero recorded benchmarks reflects that it is not designed for standard benchmark suites. The RTX 5050 Mobile is a laptop graphics processor with 2,560 shading units, 80 tensor cores, 20 RT cores, 8 GB of GDDR7, and 7.680 TFLOPS. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and its 83rd percentile ranking with an average score of 43268 places it in the same performance band as the Quadro M6000 24 GB and RTX 4070 SUPER, all within one percent of each other.

A builder selecting between these should look at the workload. For training large models, processing scientific data, or any task that can use 180 GB of HBM3e and 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, the B200 SXM6 is the only choice, assuming the 1000 W TDP and SXM form factor are acceptable. For gaming, ray tracing, or general consumer graphics on a mobile platform, the RTX 5050 Mobile is the functional option, given its API support and 50 W power envelope. The B200's pixel rate deficit and lack of RT cores further confirm that it is not a graphics card in the conventional sense. The RTX 5050 Mobile's nearest rivals show that its measured performance is competitive with desktop and mobile GPUs from previous generations, but it operates in a different performance class entirely from the B200. The recorded data does not support any scenario where these two compete for the same user.