NVIDIA B200 SXM6 vs NVIDIA H800 SXM5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct benchmark scores for either NVIDIA B200 SXM6 or NVIDIA H800 SXM5. Both accelerators show an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs. With zero wins recorded for either part, the head-to-head comparison rests entirely on the architectural and specification data provided.

The B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is 10.04 TFLOPS higher than the H800 SXM5's 59.30 TFLOPS. That represents a 16.9% advantage in raw single-precision compute. The FP16 comparison is more complex: the B200 SXM6 lists 69.34 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the H800 SXM5 lists 237.2 TFLOPS at a 4:1 ratio. The H800 SXM5's FP16 figure is substantially higher, but the 4:1 ratio indicates it achieves this through reduced precision operations, whereas the B200 SXM6 maintains full FP16 throughput at the same rate as its FP32.

Memory bandwidth shows a decisive shift: the B200 SXM6 provides 8.19 TB/s versus the H800 SXM5's 3.36 TB/s, a 143.8% increase. Texture rate follows a similar pattern, with the B200 SXM6 reaching 1,083.4 GTexel/s against 926.6 GTexel/s for the H800 SXM5, a 16.9% advantage. Pixel rates are nearly identical, with 43.92 GPixel/s on the B200 SXM6 and 42.12 GPixel/s on the H800 SXM5.

Architecture Differences

The B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip built on the Blackwell architecture, while the H800 SXM5 uses the GH100 chip on the Hopper architecture. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process node, but the transistor counts differ dramatically. The B200 SXM6 packs 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 127.8 million per mm². The H800 SXM5 contains 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, with a density of 98.3 million per mm². The B200 SXM6 therefore has 2.6 times the transistor count and double the die area.

The B200 SXM6 features 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The H800 SXM5 has 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. Tensor core counts follow the TMU counts: 592 for the B200 SXM6 and 528 for the H800 SXM5. Neither part lists RT cores.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The B200 SXM6 has a base clock of 120 MHz and a boost clock of 1830 MHz. The H800 SXM5 has a base clock of 1095 MHz and a boost clock of 1755 MHz. The B200 SXM6's boost clock is 4.3% higher, but its base clock is far lower, suggesting a different power management profile. Memory clocks also diverge: the B200 SXM6 runs its HBM3e at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective, while the H800 SXM5 runs its HBM3 at 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective.

The B200 SXM6 uses a PCIe 6.0 x16 bus interface, while the H800 SXM5 uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Memory capacity and type differ: the B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e on a 8192-bit bus, while the H800 SXM5 has 80 GB of HBM3 on a 5120-bit bus. The B200 SXM6's memory bus is 60% wider, and its capacity is 125% larger.

The B200 SXM6 carries a 1000 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The H800 SXM5 has a 700 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 1100 W. The H800 SXM5 lists an 8-pin EPS power connector, while the B200 SXM6 lists no specific connector. Both are SXM modules with no display outputs. The B200 SXM6 lists no API support (DirectX, OpenGL, Vulkan all N/A), while the H800 SXM5 lists null values for those fields.

Release dates differ by roughly 19 months: the H800 SXM5 launched on 2023-03-20, and the B200 SXM6 launched on 2024-10-31. The H800 SXM5's predecessor is Server Ada, and its successor is Server Blackwell. The B200 SXM6's predecessor is Server Hopper, and its successor is Server Rubin. The B200 SXM6 has a launch MSRP of 34,999 USD; the H800 SXM5 has no listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which accelerator has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS FP32, which is 10.04 TFLOPS higher than the H800 SXM5's 59.30 TFLOPS, a 16.9% advantage.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: The B200 SXM6 provides 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth from 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus. The H800 SXM5 provides 3.36 TB/s from 80 GB of HBM3 on a 5120-bit bus. The B200 SXM6's bandwidth is 143.8% higher.

Q: What is the FP16 performance difference?

A: The B200 SXM6 lists 69.34 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, while the H800 SXM5 lists 237.2 TFLOPS at a 4:1 ratio. The H800 SXM5's higher number comes from reduced-precision operations, while the B200 SXM6 maintains full FP16 throughput.

Q: Are there differences in transistor density?

A: Yes. The B200 SXM6 has 127.8 million transistors per mm² from 208,000 million total on a 1628 mm² die. The H800 SXM5 has 98.3 million per mm² from 80,000 million total on an 814 mm² die.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The B200 SXM6 has a 1000 W TDP with a suggested 1400 W PSU. The H800 SXM5 has a 700 W TDP with a suggested 1100 W PSU. The B200 SXM6 requires 42.9% more power and a 27.3% larger PSU.

Q: Which part has newer connectivity?

A: The B200 SXM6 uses PCIe 6.0 x16, while the H800 SXM5 uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Both are SXM modules with no display outputs.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear generational split. The B200 SXM6 wins on FP32 compute (69.34 vs 59.30 TFLOPS), memory capacity (180 GB vs 80 GB), memory bandwidth (8.19 vs 3.36 TB/s), texture rate (1,083.4 vs 926.6 GTexel/s), transistor count (208,000 vs 80,000 million), and bus interface (PCIe 6.0 vs 5.0). The H800 SXM5 wins on FP16 throughput (237.2 vs 69.34 TFLOPS) but only under a 4:1 reduced-precision ratio, and it has a lower TDP (700 W vs 1000 W).

The B200 SXM6's memory bandwidth advantage of 143.8% and capacity advantage of 125% make it the stronger choice for memory-bound workloads. Its FP32 lead of 16.9% confirms higher sustained compute throughput. The H800 SXM5's FP16 figure is misleading for comparison purposes because the 4:1 ratio indicates lossy operations; the B200 SXM6's 1:1 ratio means it does not rely on precision reduction to reach its FP16 number.

The H800 SXM5 draws 300 W less power and requires a 300 W smaller PSU, which could matter in power-constrained deployments. However, the B200 SXM6's overall specifications point to a newer, larger, and more capable architecture. The B200 SXM6 is the higher-performing part across nearly every meaningful compute and memory metric.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA B200 SXM6 | NVIDIA H800 SXM5 |

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

| Chip | GB100 | GH100 |

| Architecture | Blackwell | Hopper |

| Generation | Server Blackwell (Bxx) | Server Hopper (Hxx) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 208,000 million | 80,000 million |

| Die Size | 1628 mm² | 814 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 127.8M / mm² | 98.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 120 MHz | 1095 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1830 MHz | 1755 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz, 8 Gbps effective | 1313 MHz, 5.3 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 180 GB | 80 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3e | HBM3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 5120 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 8.19 TB/s | 3.36 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 18944 | 16896 |

| TMUs | 592 | 528 |

| ROPs | 24 | 24 |

| Tensor Cores | 592 | 528 |

| Pixel Rate | 43.92 GPixel/s | 42.12 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,083.4 GTexel/s | 926.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 69.34 TFLOPS | 59.30 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1) | 237.2 TFLOPS (4:1) |

| TDP | 1000 W | 700 W |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | 8-pin EPS |

| Suggested PSU | 1400 W | 1100 W |

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

| Display Outputs | No outputs | No outputs |

| DirectX | N/A | Not listed |

| OpenGL | N/A | Not listed |

| Vulkan | N/A | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2024-10-31 | 2023-03-20 |

| Predecessor | Server Hopper | Server Ada |

| Successor | Server Rubin | Server Blackwell |

| Launch MSRP | 34,999 USD | Not listed |

| Production Status | Active | Active |

Where Each One Wins

The B200 SXM6 wins in FP32 compute, delivering 69.34 TFLOPS against 59.30 TFLOPS. It wins in memory bandwidth by a wide margin: 8.19 TB/s versus 3.36 TB/s, which benefits large model training and inference workloads that repeatedly access weight matrices. Its 180 GB memory capacity versus 80 GB allows larger batch sizes and bigger model fits without sharding. The B200 SXM6 also wins on texture rate (1,083.4 vs 926.6 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (43.92 vs 42.12 GPixel/s), though these are less relevant for compute accelerators.

The H800 SXM5 wins in FP16 throughput when using reduced precision, posting 237.2 TFLOPS versus 69.34 TFLOPS. This matters for workloads that can tolerate 4:1 precision loss, such as certain inference paths. The H800 SXM5 also wins on power efficiency: 700 W versus 1000 W TDP, and its 1100 W suggested PSU versus 1400 W means lower infrastructure demands. Its lower base clock of 1095 MHz versus 120 MHz suggests a more conventional idle-to-load transition, though the B200 SXM6's higher boost clock of 1830 MHz versus 1755 MHz gives it a peak advantage.

The B200 SXM6 wins on connectivity with PCIe 6.0 x16 versus PCIe 5.0 x16, enabling faster host-device transfers. Its transistor density advantage (127.8M / mm² vs 98.3M / mm²) reflects a more advanced implementation despite the same 5 nm node. The H800 SXM5 wins on release timing, having been available since 2023-03-20, while the B200 SXM6 arrived on 2024-10-31. For workloads dominated by FP32 arithmetic, memory capacity, or memory bandwidth, the B200 SXM6 is the stronger choice. For workloads that leverage reduced-precision FP16 and have strict power budgets, the H800 SXM5 retains a niche advantage.