NVIDIA B200 SXM6 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is a server accelerator with no recorded benchmark scores in the database, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 delivers a substantial set of measured results. The RTX 5080’s average benchmark score of 56,083 places it in the 87th percentile of all GPUs tracked, a strong position that reflects its performance across DirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan workloads. In contrast, the B200 SXM6 sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of zero, indicating that no standardized consumer benchmark data exists for it. This makes a direct numerical comparison impossible for most tests, but the available data still allows for meaningful analysis of the RTX 5080’s standing against its nearest rivals.

The RTX 5080’s strongest recorded result comes from Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 255,450, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 235,901. These figures indicate robust compute performance in cross-platform APIs. In Passmark tests, the GPU delivers 36,565 in G3D, 21,789 in GPU Compute, and 1,415 in G2D. The DirectX legacy tests show more modest numbers: 389 in DirectX 9, 324 in DirectX 11, 208 in DirectX 10, and 151 in DirectX 12. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 8,637 provides a modern gaming workload result.

Relative to its nearest rivals, the RTX 5080 leads the AMD Radeon 8060S by 0.6% (55,757 average), the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB by 0.7% (55,698 average), and the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X by 2.3% (54,828 average). It trails the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE by 2.2% (57,367 average). These margins are narrow, indicating that the RTX 5080 sits in a competitive cluster where no single card dominates by a wide margin. The data shows the RTX 5080 edges out three of four rivals but falls slightly behind the RX 9070 GRE, making it a solid but not unrivaled performer in its segment.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share the same 5 nm process node and TSMC foundry, but diverge sharply in almost every other architectural aspect. The B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip under the Blackwell architecture, classified under the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation, while the RTX 5080 uses the GB203 chip under Blackwell 2.0, part of the GeForce 50 series. This distinction reflects different design goals: the B200 targets server compute with a massive die, while the RTX 5080 aims for client graphics with a more moderate footprint.

The B200 SXM6 packs 208,000 million transistors on a 1,628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 127.8 million per mm². The RTX 5080 contains 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die, with a density of 120.6 million per mm². The B200’s die is over four times larger and holds nearly five times the transistors, though its density advantage is modest at roughly 6%. This indicates that the B200 prioritizes raw scale over packing efficiency, while the RTX 5080 achieves a similar density with far fewer resources.

Memory systems differ fundamentally. The B200 SXM6 uses 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8,192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 5080 uses 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus, providing 960.0 GB/s. The B200’s bandwidth is roughly 8.5 times higher, a gap that reflects the server card’s need to feed massive parallel workloads. The RTX 5080’s GDDR7 operates at 1,875 MHz with 30 Gbps effective speed, while the B200’s HBM3e runs at 2,000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective, a lower per-pin rate but with vastly more pins.

Compute resources also diverge. The B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, whereas the RTX 5080 has 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. The B200 leads in shader and texture hardware, but the RTX 5080 has nearly five times the ROPs, which explains its higher pixel rate: 293.1 GPixel/s versus the B200’s 43.92 GPixel/s. Texture rates are closer, with the B200 at 1,083.4 GTexel/s and the RTX 5080 at 879.3 GTexel/s. The B200’s FP32 throughput of 69.34 TFLOPS exceeds the RTX 5080’s 56.28 TFLOPS, as does its FP16 output at the same 1:1 ratio.

The RTX 5080 includes 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores, while the B200 SXM6 lists 592 tensor cores but no RT core count. Clock speeds tell a different story: the B200 has a 120 MHz base and 1,830 MHz boost, while the RTX 5080 runs at 2,295 MHz base and 2,617 MHz boost. The RTX 5080’s higher clocks contribute to its ROP and pixel rate advantages despite fewer shaders.

Where Each One Wins

The B200 SXM6 wins decisively in memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 180 GB of HBM3e with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth is in a different class from the RTX 5080’s 16 GB and 960.0 GB/s. For workloads that require massive datasets resident on the GPU, such as large model inference or scientific simulation, the B200’s memory subsystem provides a clear advantage. Its 69.34 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 compute also exceed the RTX 5080’s 56.28 TFLOPS, giving it a lead in raw floating-point throughput. The B200’s 592 tensor cores versus the RTX 5080’s 336 further reinforces its position for tensor-heavy tasks.

The RTX 5080 wins in pixel processing and graphics output. Its 293.1 GPixel/s pixel rate is over six times the B200’s 43.92 GPixel/s, and its 112 ROPs versus 24 ROPs explains this gap. The RTX 5080 also supports full graphics APIs: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the B200 lists N/A for all three. Display outputs further separate them: the RTX 5080 has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b, while the B200 has no outputs. The RTX 5080’s dual-slot design and 16-pin connector make it a client-installable card, whereas the B200 is an SXM module with a 1000 W TDP and 1400 W suggested PSU.

Clock speeds favor the RTX 5080 in latency-sensitive tasks. Its 2,617 MHz boost is substantially higher than the B200’s 1,830 MHz, which helps in workloads where single-threaded or lightly threaded performance matters. The B200’s 120 MHz base clock is exceptionally low, a feature common in server accelerators that rely on boost behavior under load.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 provides 8.19 TB/s bandwidth from 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8,192-bit bus, versus the RTX 5080’s 960.0 GB/s from 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Does the RTX 5080 support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, the RTX 5080 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, while the B200 SXM6 lists N/A for all three APIs.

Q: What is the transistor count for each GPU?

A: The B200 SXM6 has 208,000 million transistors on a 1,628 mm² die, while the RTX 5080 has 45,600 million on a 378 mm² die.

Q: How does the RTX 5080 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 5080’s average benchmark score of 56,083 is 0.6% above the AMD Radeon 8060S, 0.7% above the RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, and 2.3% above the Radeon Pro W5700X, but 2.2% below the RX 9070 GRE.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units versus the RTX 5080’s 10,752, giving the server card a 76% lead in shader count.

Q: Can the B200 SXM6 output to a display?

A: No, the B200 SXM6 has no display outputs, while the RTX 5080 includes 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA B200 SXM6 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 |

|----------------|------------------|--------------------------|

| Architecture | Blackwell | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Generation | Server Blackwell (Bxx) | GeForce 50 |

| Chip | GB100 | GB203 |

| Transistors | 208,000 million | 45,600 million |

| Die Size | 1628 mm² | 378 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 127.8M / mm² | 120.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 120 MHz | 2295 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1830 MHz | 2617 MHz |

| Memory Size | 180 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3e | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 8.19 TB/s | 960.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 18944 | 10752 |

| TMUs | 592 | 336 |

| ROPs | 24 | 112 |

| Tensor Cores | 592 | 336 |

| RT Cores | N/A | 84 |

| Pixel Rate | 43.92 GPixel/s | 293.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,083.4 GTexel/s | 879.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 69.34 TFLOPS | 56.28 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1) | 56.28 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 1000 W | 360 W |

| Slot Width | SXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | N/A | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 1400 W | 750 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 6.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | N/A | 304 mm x 137 mm x 40 mm |

| Release Date | 2024-10-31 | 2025-01-29 |

| Predecessor | Server Hopper | GeForce 40 |

| Successor | Server Rubin | GeForce 60 |

| Launch MSRP | 34,999 USD | 999 USD |

The Verdict

The data separates these two GPUs into distinct use cases with little overlap. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is a server accelerator with a 1000 W TDP, SXM module form factor, and no display outputs. Its 180 GB HBM3e memory, 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, and 69.34 TFLOPS FP32 make it appropriate for data center workloads where massive memory pools and high compute throughput are required. The launch MSRP of 34,999 USD reflects this enterprise positioning.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 is a client graphics card with a 360 W TDP, dual-slot design, and full display outputs. Its benchmark scores place it in the 87th percentile, with an average score of 56,083 that narrowly beats several AMD rivals. The RTX 5080’s 293.1 GPixel/s pixel rate and 112 ROPs give it strong rasterization performance, while its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 covers modern graphics APIs. The launch MSRP of 999 USD aligns with its consumer positioning.

For users needing server-class memory and compute, the B200 SXM6 is the only choice, as the RTX 5080 cannot match its memory capacity or bandwidth. For users needing graphics output, gaming, or client workstation tasks, the RTX 5080 is the only viable option, since the B200 has no display outputs and no graphics API support. The RTX 5080’s benchmark data shows it competes closely with AMD’s recent offerings, leading three of four nearest rivals by margins under 2.5%. The B200 SXM6, lacking benchmark scores, cannot be compared on the same scale, but its architectural specifications indicate a purpose-built compute accelerator rather than a graphics product.