NVIDIA GB10 vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

NVIDIA GB10 and NVIDIA N1 20SM share the same Blackwell 2.0 architecture, the same GB20B chip, and the same 5 nm TSMC process node, yet the recorded data shows they are positioned for entirely different workloads. The GB10 is a fully enabled part with an active production status, a launch MSRP of 3,999 USD, and a release date of 2025-10-14. The N1 20SM, with a release date of 2026-05-31, appears to be a more constrained variant, though both are listed as Active in the database. The benchmark evidence currently available covers only the GB10, which holds a 95th percentile ranking among all GPUs, while the N1 20SM has no recorded benchmarks and sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of zero. This page examines where each design wins, how the architecture differs, and what the specification gaps imply for real-world performance.

Where Each One Wins

The GB10 wins every measurable category in the database because it is the only one of the two with benchmark results. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 120137 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 114648 place it firmly in the upper tier of recorded GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 117393. The N1 20SM, by contrast, has an empty benchmark array, no average score, and no rival comparisons, meaning the data cannot confirm any performance advantage for it in any test. The GB10’s percentile rank of 95 versus the N1 20SM’s 50 percentile paints a clear picture: the GB10 is designed to deliver high compute throughput, while the N1 20SM’s position in the database suggests a more modest target, likely for integrated or low-power scenarios where raw score is secondary.

For use cases, the GB10’s shading units (6144), texture mapping units (384), and render output units (48) indicate a part built for heavy parallel workloads, such as graphics rendering or compute acceleration. The N1 20SM, with 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, has less than half the execution resources, so it would logically fall behind in tasks that scale with those units. The FP32 compute rating tells the same story: the GB10 delivers 29.71 TFLOPS, while the N1 20SM manages 12.01 TFLOPS. In the absence of direct head-to-head benchmarks, the specification deltas serve as the primary evidence for where each part wins. The GB10 wins in raw throughput, pixel fill, and texture work. The N1 20SM, lacking any benchmark data, cannot be assigned a win in any recorded test.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs use the same GB20B chip, the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, and a 5 nm process from TSMC, but they diverge in every execution resource count. The GB10’s chip is identical in die size (382 mm²) to the N1 20SM, which is unusual because typically a smaller chip would accompany a lower-tier part. The database lists the same die size for both, indicating the N1 20SM is likely a cut-down version of the same silicon, with disabled sections rather than a physically smaller die. The transistor count is unknown for both, so the comparison cannot extend to density.

The shading units differ by a factor of 2.4: the GB10 has 6144, the N1 20SM has 2560. Texture mapping units follow the same ratio, with 384 versus 160, and render output units drop from 48 to 24. Ray tracing cores are present in both, but the GB10 has 48 while the N1 20SM has 20, a reduction of more than half. Tensor cores, which handle AI and matrix workloads, are 384 on the GB10 versus 80 on the N1 20SM, a gap of 4.8 times. This suggests the N1 20SM is not intended for the same level of tensor-heavy inference or training tasks.

The clock behavior also differs. The GB10 has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost of 2418 MHz. The N1 20SM has a much lower base clock of 741 MHz but a boost of 2346 MHz, which is only 72 MHz below the GB10’s boost. The N1 20SM’s lower base clock implies it is designed to conserve power when idle or under light load, while its boost clock shows it can still reach near-GB10 speeds when demanded, though with far fewer execution units. Memory clocks are identical at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, and both use 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, yielding the same 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The N1 20SM’s TDP is unknown, while the GB10 is rated at 140 W with a suggested PSU of 300 W. Both are IGP slot width with no power connectors, reinforcing the integrated design philosophy.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries, so the comparison must rely on the GB10’s absolute scores and the N1 20SM’s absence of scores. The GB10’s Geekbench OpenCL result of 120137 and Vulkan result of 114648 are the only recorded performance numbers. The average benchmark score for the GB10 is 117393, which places it 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation (average score 117088) and 1.3% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 (average score 118976). Against the other nearest rivals, the GB10 is 2.6% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (average score 114395) and 3% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (average score 113944).

For the N1 20SM, there are no rivals, no scores, and no delta percentages, so no head-to-head analysis can be performed. The recorded data shows the N1 20SM with an average benchmark score of zero, which in the database format indicates no completed tests. The wins in this section are entirely one-sided: the GB10 wins against its four nearest rivals by margins ranging from 0.3% to 3%, while the N1 20SM has no measurable wins or losses. The FP32 and FP16 compute rates for the GB10 (29.71 TFLOPS for both) versus the N1 20SM (12.01 TFLOPS for both) further underscore that any benchmark involving floating-point math would favor the GB10 by roughly 2.5 times, assuming identical clock scaling.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ on nearly every specification except where noted. The GB10 has a base clock of 1665 MHz; the N1 20SM has 741 MHz. The boost clocks are close: 2418 MHz versus 2346 MHz, a 72 MHz difference. Shading units are 6144 versus 2560, TMUs are 384 versus 160, ROPs are 48 versus 24, RT cores are 48 versus 20, and tensor cores are 384 versus 80. Pixel rate is 116.1 GPixel/s for the GB10 versus 56.30 GPixel/s for the N1 20SM. Texture rate is 928.5 GTexel/s versus 375.4 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 are both 29.71 TFLOPS for the GB10 and 12.01 TFLOPS for the N1 20SM.

The TDP is 140 W for the GB10, while the N1 20SM’s TDP is unknown. The suggested PSU is 300 W for the GB10, with no value listed for the N1 20SM. Both have no power connectors and an IGP slot width. Dimensions are provided only for the GB10: 150 mm length, 51 mm height, 150 mm width (5.9 inches by 2 inches by 5.9 inches). The N1 20SM has no recorded dimensions. Release dates differ: 2025-10-14 for the GB10 versus 2026-05-31 for the N1 20SM. The GB10’s predecessor is Server Hopper and successor is Server Rubin, while the N1 20SM has neither. The GB10 has a launch MSRP of 3,999 USD; the N1 20SM has no launch MSRP. The N1 20SM’s generation is listed as Blackwell IGP (N1x), whereas the GB10 is in Server Blackwell (Bxx). All other fields match: memory size (128 GB), type (LPDDR5X), bus width (256 bit), bandwidth (273.2 GB/s), memory clock (1067 MHz, 8.5 Gbps effective), bus interface (PCIe 5.0 x16), display outputs (1x HDMI), and API support (N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The NVIDIA GB10 has a boost clock of 2418 MHz, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM boosts to 2346 MHz. The difference is 72 MHz in favor of the GB10.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same memory configuration?

A: Yes. Both use 128 GB of LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus, a memory clock of 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective), and a bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s.

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference?

A: The GB10 delivers 29.71 TFLOPS, and the N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS. The GB10’s FP32 rate is more than double that of the N1 20SM.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores for the N1 20SM?

A: No. The database lists an empty benchmark array for the N1 20SM, with an average score of zero and a 50th percentile rank. The GB10 has scores of 120137 in Geekbench OpenCL and 114648 in Geekbench Vulkan.

Q: How does the GB10 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GB10’s average score of 117393 is 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, 1.3% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W7700, 2.6% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB, and 3% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile.

Q: Which GPU uses the same chip and process node?

A: Both the GB10 and N1 20SM use the GB20B chip, the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, and a 5 nm TSMC process. The die size is 382 mm² for both.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the NVIDIA GB10 is the clear choice for any workload that demands compute throughput, tensor operations, or graphics processing. It holds a 95th percentile rank, has a confirmed average benchmark score of 117393, and shows concrete wins over its nearest rivals in the database. The N1 20SM, with no benchmarks and a 50th percentile rank, cannot be recommended for performance-sensitive tasks based on available evidence. Its lower execution resources (2560 shading units versus 6144, 80 tensor cores versus 384) and lower FP32 rate (12.01 TFLOPS versus 29.71 TFLOPS) indicate it is built for efficiency or integration rather than peak output.

The GB10’s higher base clock (1665 MHz versus 741 MHz) and higher pixel rate (116.1 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s) reinforce its role as the more capable part. The N1 20SM may serve scenarios where power draw is critical, but its TDP is unknown, so the data cannot support that claim. The GB10 also carries a launch MSRP of 3,999 USD, while the N1 20SM has no listed price, leaving its market position undefined. For users who need measured performance, the GB10 is the only part with verified scores. For those who require minimal footprint and are willing to accept unverified performance, the N1 20SM exists in the database as a newer, lower-resource option, but no benchmark evidence supports its selection. The verdict from the data is straightforward: the GB10 wins every recorded metric, and the N1 20SM’s advantages, if any, are not present in the current records.