NVIDIA B200 SXM6 vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server Comparison

NVIDIA’s Blackwell architecture spans two very different server parts: the B200 SXM6 and the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server. Both target the same generation and share a 5 nm TSMC process, but the recorded data shows they are built for entirely different workloads. The B200 SXM6 is a massive accelerator module with 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server is a dual-slot PCIe card with 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die. The benchmark results, specification tables, and architectural details in the database reveal a clear split between raw compute density and conventional graphics throughput.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains only one recorded benchmark for the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server: the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, where it scored 5996. The B200 SXM6 has no benchmark entries, so a direct head-to-head comparison is limited to this single data point. The nearest rivals for the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M with an average score of 6000, the AMD Radeon RX 6400 at 6001, the AMD FirePro W4100 at 5987, and the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M at 5986. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server sits within 0.2% of these cards, meaning its Steel Nomad result is effectively mid-pack relative to that group.

Because the B200 SXM6 has no benchmark scores, the head-to-head analysis must rely on the theoretical throughput figures recorded in the database. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server delivers 126.0 TFLOPS FP32 and the same 126.0 TFLOPS FP16, while the B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16. That places the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server roughly 82% ahead in single-precision and half-precision floating-point work. Texture rate also favors the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server: 1,968.0 GTexel/s versus 1,083.4 GTexel/s, a margin of about 82%. Pixel rate is even more lopsided: 502.5 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s, a 10.4x difference.

The B200 SXM6 counters with memory bandwidth. Its HBM3e stack provides 8.19 TB/s across an 8192-bit bus, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server uses GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus for 1.79 TB/s. The B200 SXM6 leads by roughly 4.6x in raw memory bandwidth. Capacity is also a major differentiator: 180 GB versus 96 GB, a 1.9x advantage for the B200 SXM6. The B200 SXM6 also has a higher boost clock in terms of memory speed, listed as 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective), though the effective data rate is higher on the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server due to the GDDR7 signaling.

The B200 SXM6 draws 1000 W with a suggested PSU of 1400 W, whereas the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server draws 600 W with a suggested PSU of 1000 W. That power difference is not a benchmark score, but it contextualizes the performance data: the B200 SXM6 consumes 67% more power while delivering lower FP32 and texture throughput, but its bandwidth and capacity are in a different class.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 performance based on the database?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server records 126.0 TFLOPS FP32, while the B200 SXM6 records 69.34 TFLOPS FP32. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server leads by approximately 82%.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The B200 SXM6 uses 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server uses 96 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth. The B200 SXM6 has more than 4.5x the bandwidth and nearly double the capacity.

Q: What is the only recorded benchmark score?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scored 5996 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The B200 SXM6 has no benchmark entries in the database.

Q: How does the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server compare to its nearest rivals in that benchmark?

A: It scores 5996, which is 0.1% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6000) and AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6001), and 0.2% above the AMD FirePro W4100 (5987) and NVIDIA Quadro K4000M (5986).

Q: What are the power requirements listed?

A: The B200 SXM6 has a 1000 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server has a 600 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 1000 W.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server boosts to 2617 MHz, while the B200 SXM6 boosts to 1830 MHz. The base clocks are 1590 MHz and 120 MHz, respectively.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server is the faster card for conventional GPU compute and graphics workloads, while the B200 SXM6 is built for memory-bound acceleration where capacity and bandwidth dominate. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server leads in FP32 (126.0 vs 69.34 TFLOPS), FP16 (126.0 vs 69.34 TFLOPS), texture rate (1,968.0 vs 1,083.4 GTexel/s), and pixel rate (502.5 vs 43.92 GPixel/s). It also has a substantially higher boost clock (2617 MHz vs 1830 MHz) and a higher base clock (1590 MHz vs 120 MHz).

The B200 SXM6 wins on memory: 180 GB versus 96 GB capacity, 8.19 TB/s versus 1.79 TB/s bandwidth, and an 8192-bit bus versus 512-bit. It also has more transistors (208,000 million vs 92,200 million) and a larger die (1628 mm² vs 750 mm²), but those advantages do not translate into higher floating-point throughput in the recorded specifications. The B200 SXM6 uses HBM3e, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server uses GDDR7, which explains the bandwidth gap.

For any workload that depends on FP32 or FP16 shader math, the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server delivers nearly twice the throughput. For any workload that requires massive memory capacity or extreme bandwidth, the B200 SXM6 is the only choice between the two. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server also offers display outputs (4x DisplayPort 2.1b), while the B200 SXM6 has none, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the B200 SXM6 lists N/A for all three APIs.

Given the 5996 Steel Nomad score and the nearest rival deltas (all within 0.2%), the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server is not a top-tier performer in that specific test, but its theoretical compute rates place it well ahead of the B200 SXM6 in general-purpose math. The B200 SXM6, despite its lower TFLOPS, offers 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, which is the kind of figure required for large model inference or high-throughput data movement.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server uses GB202. The B200 SXM6 has 18944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 24 ROPs; the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server has 24064 shading units, 752 TMUs, and 192 ROPs. Tensor core counts are 592 for the B200 SXM6 and 752 for the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server, and the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server adds 188 RT cores, a feature the B200 SXM6 does not list.

Clock speeds are dramatically different. The B200 SXM6 runs at a 120 MHz base and 1830 MHz boost, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server runs at 1590 MHz base and 2617 MHz boost. Memory clocks are listed as 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) for the B200 SXM6 and 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) for the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server, though the bus widths and memory types make direct clock comparisons less meaningful.

The B200 SXM6 is an SXM Module with no display outputs and a PCIe 6.0 x16 interface. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server is a dual-slot card, 267 mm long, 111 mm high, and 40 mm wide, with a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, one 16-pin power connector, and 4x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. Power draw is 1000 W for the B200 SXM6 and 600 W for the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server. The B200 SXM6 has a launch MSRP of 34,999 USD, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

Both chips are built on TSMC's 5 nm process, but they diverge in scale. The B200 SXM6 packs 208,000 million transistors into a 1628 mm² die, giving a density of 127.8M transistors per mm². The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server packs 92,200 million transistors into a 750 mm² die, yielding 122.9M per mm². The B200 SXM6 is therefore more than twice the die area and has more than twice the transistor count, yet its transistor density is only slightly higher.

The B200 SXM6 uses HBM3e memory, which explains its 8192-bit bus and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server uses GDDR7, a more conventional memory type for graphics cards, with a 512-bit bus and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth. The memory architecture is the defining difference: the B200 SXM6 is designed for data-center-scale memory pools, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server uses a standard graphics memory layout.

The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server has 188 RT cores, a feature absent from the B200 SXM6's specification list. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the B200 SXM6 lists N/A for all three. The B200 SXM6 has no display outputs, whereas the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server has 4x DisplayPort 2.1b. Both cards share the same generation (Server Blackwell, Bxx) and the same predecessor (Server Hopper) and successor (Server Rubin).

The base clock of 120 MHz on the B200 SXM6 is unusually low, likely reflecting a power-management design that relies on boost behavior rather than sustained base frequency. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server's 1590 MHz base clock is more typical of a graphics card. The boost clocks, 1830 MHz versus 2617 MHz, reinforce the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server's focus on shader throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server wins in every floating-point and rasterization metric in the database. Its FP32 and FP16 throughput (126.0 TFLOPS each) is nearly double that of the B200 SXM6 (69.34 TFLOPS each). Its texture rate (1,968.0 GTexel/s) is 82% higher, and its pixel rate (502.5 GPixel/s) is over ten times higher. The presence of RT cores and full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support makes it the only one of the two that can handle graphics rendering, ray tracing, or any API-based workload. The lower 600 W power draw and the dual-slot PCIe form factor also make it the more deployable option in standard server chassis.

The B200 SXM6 wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 180 GB of HBM3e is 1.9x the 96 GB of the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server, and its 8.19 TB/s bandwidth is roughly 4.6x higher. The 8192-bit bus is a 16x wider interface than the 512-bit bus on the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server. For workloads that are bandwidth-limited, such as large-scale matrix operations or inference with massive model weights, this advantage is decisive. The B200 SXM6 also has a higher transistor count (208,000 million vs 92,200 million) and a larger die (1628 mm² vs 750 mm²), which may indicate more specialized compute logic even if the measured TFLOPS are lower.

The launch MSRP of 34,999 USD for the B200 SXM6 places it at a different price tier, but the database does not provide a price for the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server, so no comparative cost analysis is possible. The percentile data shows the B200 SXM6 at the 50th percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 0, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server sits at the 34th percentile with an average score of 5996. Those figures reflect different benchmark coverage, not necessarily overall quality, because the B200 SXM6 has no recorded tests.

In practical terms, the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server is the choice for any task that needs graphics APIs, ray tracing, or high FP32/FP16 compute rates with conventional memory. The B200 SXM6 is the choice for memory-heavy server workloads where 180 GB and 8.19 TB/s are required, and where the lack of display outputs and graphics API support is irrelevant. The data does not show any overlap: the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server dominates compute and rendering, while the B200 SXM6 dominates memory capacity and bandwidth.