NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single recorded benchmark result for the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC: a Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831. This places it at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning it outperforms every other recorded GPU. The NVIDIA N1 20SM has no benchmark entries, so its average benchmark score is recorded as zero and its percentile rank sits at 50. Direct head-to-head comparisons are therefore impossible from the recorded data, but the B300 SXM6 AC can be positioned against its nearest listed rivals.

The B300 SXM6 AC leads the NVIDIA B200 by 7 percent in average benchmark score. The B200 records an average score of 345,482, while the B300 SXM6 AC posts 369,831. That gap widens to 10.4 percent over the NVIDIA H200 NVL, which scores 334,891. Against the AMD Instinct MI300X, the B300 SXM6 AC is 16.3 percent ahead, with the AMD part scoring 317,994. The largest delta in the recorded rival set is against the NVIDIA L40S, where the B300 SXM6 AC holds a 25 percent advantage; the L40S scores 295,763.

These deltas matter more than the raw score alone. A 7 percent lead over the B200 shows that the B300 SXM6 AC is a meaningful step up within the same vendor family, not just a paper refresh. The 10.4 percent margin over the H200 NVL puts it clearly ahead of the previous high-capacity memory server part. The 16.3 percent gap over the MI300X indicates that the B300 SXM6 AC also outpaces AMD's flagship accelerator in this workload. The 25 percent margin over the L40S is the largest in the group, which makes sense given that the L40S targets a different segment of the server market with lower memory capacity and bandwidth.

The N1 20SM, lacking any benchmark records, cannot be ranked against these parts. Its 50th percentile placement is a neutral default rather than a measured result. Any comparison involving the N1 20SM must rely on architectural and specification differences rather than performance data.

Architecture Differences

The B300 SXM6 AC uses the GB110 chip, built on the Blackwell Ultra architecture, while the N1 20SM uses the GB20B chip on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process, but the similarities end there.

The B300 SXM6 AC integrates 208,000 million transistors on a die size of 1628 mm². That yields a transistor density of 127.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The N1 20SM has an unknown transistor count, but its die size is 382 mm², which is roughly a quarter of the B300 SXM6 AC's die area. The N1 20SM's transistor density is not recorded, so no direct density comparison is possible.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The B300 SXM6 AC uses 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The N1 20SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s. The B300 SXM6 AC has 30 times more memory bandwidth, which is critical for data-heavy server workloads. The N1 20SM's memory clock runs at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective data rate, while the B300 SXM6 AC runs at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective. The B300 SXM6 AC's wider bus is the primary driver of its bandwidth advantage.

Compute resources diverge sharply. The B300 SXM6 AC has 18,944 shading units, 592 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs. The N1 20SM has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The B300 SXM6 AC has roughly 7.4 times more shading units and 3.7 times more TMUs. The ROP count is identical at 24, which is unusual given the massive difference in other units.

Tensor core counts also differ. The B300 SXM6 AC has 592 tensor cores, while the N1 20SM has 80. The N1 20SM additionally has 20 ray tracing cores, while the B300 SXM6 AC has no recorded RT core count. This suggests the N1 20SM is designed for graphics-inclusive workloads, while the B300 SXM6 AC focuses on compute acceleration.

Clock behavior is another differentiator. The B300 SXM6 AC has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost clock of 2032 MHz. The N1 20SM has a much lower base clock of 741 MHz but a higher boost clock of 2346 MHz. The N1 20SM's boost clock is 15.4 percent higher than the B300 SXM6 AC's boost clock, but the B300 SXM6 AC's vastly larger core count dominates the performance equation.

Pixel and texture rates reflect these differences. The B300 SXM6 AC delivers 48.77 GPixel/s and 1,202.9 GTexel/s. The N1 20SM delivers 56.30 GPixel/s and 375.4 GTexel/s. Despite fewer cores, the N1 20SM has a 15.4 percent higher pixel rate due to its higher boost clock and identical ROP count. Texture rate goes the other way: the B300 SXM6 AC is more than 3 times higher.

FP32 and FP16 performance are both 76.99 TFLOPS on the B300 SXM6 AC, with a 1:1 ratio. The N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16, also at 1:1. The B300 SXM6 AC has 6.4 times the floating-point throughput.

The B300 SXM6 AC is a SXM Module with a 1100 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1500 W. The N1 20SM is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with an unknown TDP and no power connectors. The B300 SXM6 AC uses PCIe 6.0 x16, while the N1 20SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The B300 SXM6 AC has no display outputs, while the N1 20SM has one HDMI output. Neither part exposes DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan APIs in the recorded data.

Where Each One Wins

The B300 SXM6 AC wins in raw compute throughput. Its 76.99 TFLOPS FP32 performance is 6.4 times the N1 20SM's 12.01 TFLOPS. Its 8.19 TB/s memory bandwidth is 30 times higher. Its 288 GB memory capacity is 2.25 times larger. These figures point to workloads dominated by large matrix operations, massive datasets, and memory-bound inference or training tasks.

The N1 20SM wins in pixel rate. Its 56.30 GPixel/s exceeds the B300 SXM6 AC's 48.77 GPixel/s by 15.4 percent. The N1 20SM also has ray tracing cores, which the B300 SXM6 AC lacks in the recorded data. Its higher boost clock of 2346 MHz versus 2032 MHz helps in single-threaded or lightly threaded scenarios where clock speed matters more than core count. The N1 20SM's integrated nature, with no power connectors and an IGP form factor, makes it suitable for systems where discrete accelerator power delivery is unavailable.

The B300 SXM6 AC's texture rate of 1,202.9 GTexel/s is more than 3 times the N1 20SM's 375.4 GTexel/s. The B300 SXM6 AC also has 592 tensor cores versus 80, making it the clear choice for tensor-heavy workloads. The N1 20SM's 20 RT cores give it a feature the B300 SXM6 AC does not record, which matters for ray tracing or hybrid rendering workloads.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The chip names are GB110 versus GB20B. The architecture names are Blackwell Ultra versus Blackwell 2.0. The generations are Server Blackwell (Bxx) versus Blackwell IGP (N1x). The B300 SXM6 AC has a release date of September 10, 2025, while the N1 20SM has a release date of May 31, 2026.

Process node is identical at 5 nm from TSMC. Transistor counts differ: 208,000 million for the B300 SXM6 AC, unknown for the N1 20SM. Die size is 1628 mm² versus 382 mm². Transistor density is 127.8M per mm² for the B300 SXM6 AC and null for the N1 20SM.

Base clocks are 1665 MHz versus 741 MHz. Boost clocks are 2032 MHz versus 2346 MHz. Memory clocks are 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective versus 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective. Memory sizes are 288 GB versus 128 GB. Memory types are HBM3e versus LPDDR5X. Bus widths are 8192 bit versus 256 bit. Bandwidth is 8.19 TB/s versus 273.2 GB/s.

Shading units are 18,944 versus 2,560. TMUs are 592 versus 160. ROPs are 24 versus 24. RT cores are null versus 20. Tensor cores are 592 versus 80. Pixel rates are 48.77 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 1,202.9 GTexel/s versus 375.4 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 are both 76.99 TFLOPS versus 12.01 TFLOPS.

TDP is 1100 W versus unknown. Slot widths are SXM Module versus IGP. Power connectors are null versus None. Suggested PSU is 1500 W versus null. Bus interfaces are PCIe 6.0 x16 versus PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are no outputs versus 1x HDMI.

The B300 SXM6 AC lists a predecessor (Server Hopper) and successor (Server Rubin), while the N1 20SM has neither. The B300 SXM6 AC has one benchmark record and a 100th percentile rank; the N1 20SM has none and a 50th percentile default. Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The B300 SXM6 AC delivers 8.19 TB/s from 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus. The N1 20SM provides 273.2 GB/s from 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus. The B300 SXM6 AC has 30 times more bandwidth.

Q: Does the N1 20SM support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the N1 20SM has 20 ray tracing cores. The B300 SXM6 AC has no recorded RT core count, indicating it does not include this feature in the database specification.

Q: What is the clock speed difference?

A: The B300 SXM6 AC has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost of 2032 MHz. The N1 20SM has a base of 741 MHz and a boost of 2346 MHz. The N1 20SM boosts 15.4 percent higher, but the B300 SXM6 AC has far more cores.

Q: Which part has more shading units?

A: The B300 SXM6 AC has 18,944 shading units, while the N1 20SM has 2,560. That is a 7.4 times advantage for the B300 SXM6 AC.

Q: Are these parts compatible with the same bus interface?

A: No. The B300 SXM6 AC uses PCIe 6.0 x16, while the N1 20SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The B300 SXM6 AC is a SXM Module, and the N1 20SM is an IGP with no power connectors.

Q: What is the performance percentile for each GPU?

A: The B300 SXM6 AC sits at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 369,831. The N1 20SM has no benchmark records and is placed at the 50th percentile with a score of zero.

The Verdict

The data separates these two parts into different categories despite sharing a manufacturer and process node. The B300 SXM6 AC is a high-end server accelerator built for maximum compute throughput. Its benchmark score of 369,831 places it at the top of the database, and its 7 to 25 percent leads over the nearest rivals confirm its position. The 76.99 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, and 288 GB memory capacity make it suitable for large-scale training, inference, and memory-intensive data processing.

The N1 20SM is an integrated GPU with a different role. Its 12.01 TFLOPS FP32 performance is a fraction of the B300 SXM6 AC's, but its 56.30 GPixel/s pixel rate is higher. Its 20 RT cores and HDMI output indicate graphics-oriented use. The N1 20SM operates without external power connectors and uses PCIe 5.0 x16, suggesting deployment in systems where the B300 SXM6 AC's 1100 W TDP and SXM form factor would be impractical.

The B300 SXM6 AC should be selected for compute-heavy server workloads where the recorded benchmark score and rival deltas matter. The N1 20SM should be selected for integrated graphics scenarios where pixel throughput, ray tracing, and low-power operation are priorities. The two parts do not compete in the same segment; the data shows complementary roles rather than direct alternatives.