NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC vs NVIDIA PG506-232 Comparison

# NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC vs NVIDIA PG506-232

The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC and NVIDIA PG506-232 represent two distinct eras of NVIDIA's server compute lineup. The B300 SXM6 AC, built on the Blackwell Ultra architecture, delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831, placing it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs. The PG506-232, an Ampere-generation part, scores 225,124, which still ranks in the 99th percentile. The raw performance gap is substantial: the B300 leads by 64.3% in the single head-to-head benchmark available, a margin that defines the entire comparison.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is decisive. The B300 SXM6 AC scores 369,831 against the PG506-232's 225,124, a 64.3% advantage. This is not a marginal generational improvement; it is a massive leap that reflects the fundamental architectural and process differences between the two cards.

To contextualize the B300's result, benchmark data shows it outperforms the NVIDIA B200 (345,482) by 7%, the NVIDIA H200 NVL (334,891) by 10.4%, the AMD Instinct MI300X (317,994) by 16.3%, and the NVIDIA L40S (295,763) by 25%. The PG506-232, meanwhile, sits in a very different competitive tier. It beats the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D (219,827) by 2.4% and the NVIDIA RTX 6000D (195,964) by 14.9%, while trailing the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB (207,124) by 8.7% and the NVIDIA L20 (251,147) by 10.4%.

The delta between the two cards is not merely additive; it is transformative. A 64.3% lead in OpenCL compute suggests that workloads offloadable to the B300 will complete in roughly 60% of the time required on the PG506-232, assuming linear scaling. The data shows no benchmark where the PG506-232 wins; the wins tally is 1–0 in favor of the B300. This is a one-sided comparison, and the numbers bear that out without exception.

Where Each One Wins

The B300 SXM6 AC wins in every measurable compute dimension. Its fp32 throughput of 76.99 TFLOPS dwarfs the PG506-232's 10.32 TFLOPS — a 7.5x raw compute advantage. FP16 performance is identical to FP32 on both cards (1:1 ratio), so the B300 also delivers 76.99 TFLOPS FP16 versus 10.32 TFLOPS on the PG506-232. Texture rate tells a similar story: 1,202.9 GTexel/s on the B300 versus 322.6 GTexel/s on the PG506-232.

Memory is where the B300's dominance becomes even more pronounced. The B300 packs 288 GB of HBM3e across an 8192-bit bus, yielding 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The PG506-232 offers 24 GB of HBM2 on a 3072-bit bus, with 933.1 GB/s. That is a 12x capacity advantage and an 8.8x bandwidth advantage for the B300. For memory-bound workloads — large language model inference, scientific simulations, big-data analytics — this is not a subtle edge; it is a categorical difference in what each card can even attempt.

The PG506-232 does have a few relative strengths, though they are niche. Its pixel rate of 138.2 GPixel/s is actually higher than the B300's 48.77 GPixel/s, and its ROP count of 96 versus 24 means the older card is comparatively less bottlenecked in rasterization-style tasks. However, with no display outputs on either card and APIs listed as N/A or null, these are compute accelerators, not graphics cards. The PG506-232 also consumes only 165 W TDP versus 1100 W on the B300, making it far easier to cool and power in dense servers. Its dual-slot form factor with an 8-pin EPS connector is far more accommodating than the B300's SXM module, which requires a 1500 W suggested PSU.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two GPUs is enormous. The B300 uses the GB110 chip on TSMC's 5 nm process, packing 208,000 million transistors into a 1628 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 127.8 million per mm². The PG506-232 uses the GA100 chip on TSMC's 7 nm node, with 54,200 million transistors on an 826 mm² die — a density of 65.6 million per mm². The B300 has nearly 4x the transistors on roughly double the die area, enabled by a more advanced process node.

Core counts reflect this scale. The B300 fields 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 592 tensor cores. The PG506-232 has 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 224 tensor cores. The B300's tensor core count is 2.6x higher, and its shading unit count is 5.3x higher. Clock speeds also favor the newer card: the B300 runs at 1665 MHz base and 2032 MHz boost, while the PG506-232 operates at 930 MHz base and 1440 MHz boost. The B300's boost clock is 41% higher, compounding the core-count advantage.

Memory technology has evolved considerably. The B300 uses HBM3e with a 2000 MHz base clock (8 Gbps effective), while the PG506-232 uses HBM2 at 1215 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective). The B300's bus width of 8192 bits is more than double the PG506-232's 3072 bits. The B300 also supports PCIe 6.0 x16, whereas the PG506-232 is limited to PCIe 4.0 x16 — a generation and bandwidth step that matters for host-device transfers in multi-GPU systems.

The B300 is a 2025 release, arriving in September, while the PG506-232 launched in April 2021. The B300's production status is Active; the PG506-232 is End-of-life. The B300's successor is listed as Server Rubin, and its predecessor is Server Hopper. The PG506-232's predecessor was Tesla Turing, and its successor is Server Ada. These are different product lineages entirely — one is a next-generation Blackwell Ultra flagship, the other a now-legacy Ampere accelerator.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is the superior compute accelerator by every measurable metric. It leads by 64.3% in OpenCL, offers 7.5x the FP32 throughput, 12x the memory capacity, and 8.8x the memory bandwidth. For any workload that scales with compute or memory — AI training, inference, HPC simulation — the B300 is the only rational choice, assuming the power and cooling infrastructure can support its 1100 W TDP and SXM module form factor.

The PG506-232 is not without merit, but its merits are contextual. At 165 W with a dual-slot design and 8-pin EPS connector, it can fit into systems where the B300 physically cannot. Its 24 GB of HBM2 and 933.1 GB/s bandwidth are still respectable for smaller models or edge deployments. The PG506-232's 99th percentile ranking shows it remains a competent performer even against newer hardware. But with an End-of-life status and a successor already in the market, it is a legacy part.

Users with existing Ampere-generation infrastructure and modest power budgets might find the PG506-232 adequate for smaller inference tasks. However, anyone comparing these two cards for new deployments should note the B300's 100th percentile standing and its 64.3% benchmark advantage. The B300's closest rivals are the B200, H200 NVL, and MI300X, all of which it beats by 7% to 25%. The PG506-232's competitive set is entirely different — it trades blows with the A100, L20, and W7900D but is not in the same performance class as the B300.

For organizations prioritizing raw throughput and memory capacity, the B300 SXM6 AC is the clear winner. For those constrained by power, space, or legacy infrastructure, the PG506-232 remains a functional, if dated, option. The data does not suggest a close contest; it suggests a generational shift where the newer part simply outclasses the older one.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC than the PG506-232 in OpenCL?

A: The B300 scores 369,831 versus 225,124 on Geekbench OpenCL, a 64.3% advantage for the B300.

Q: What are the memory capacity and bandwidth differences?

A: The B300 has 288 GB of HBM3e with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, while the PG506-232 has 24 GB of HBM2 with 933.1 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The B300 delivers 76.99 TFLOPS FP32, compared to 10.32 TFLOPS on the PG506-232 — a 7.5x difference.

Q: What are the TDP and form factor differences?

A: The B300 is an SXM module with a 1100 W TDP and a 1500 W suggested PSU, while the PG506-232 is a dual-slot card at 165 W with a 450 W suggested PSU.

Q: How does the PG506-232 compare to its own rivals?

A: It beats the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D by 2.4% and the RTX 6000D by 14.9%, but trails the NVIDIA L20 by 10.4% and the A100 PCIe 80 GB by 8.7%.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The B300 is listed as Active with a release date of September 2025, while the PG506-232 is End-of-life with a release date of April 2021.