NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in raw FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 19.9% higher than the 20.04 TFLOPS of the GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q. Both GPUs achieve identical FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio with their FP32 figures.

Q: Which GPU has the larger memory capacity and what type does it use?

A: The N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus. Despite the larger capacity and wider bus, the N1X 40SM has lower memory bandwidth at 273.2 GB/s compared to 432.0 GB/s for the RTX 4080 Max-Q.

Q: What are the architectural generations of each GPU?

A: The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD104 chip, part of the GeForce 40 Mobile generation. The N1X 40SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB20B chip, belonging to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation.

Q: How do the texture and pixel rates compare between the two?

A: The N1X 40SM has a significantly higher texture rate of 750.7 GTexel/s, which is 2.4 times the 313.2 GTexel/s of the RTX 4080 Max-Q. In pixel rate, the RTX 4080 Max-Q leads at 108.0 GPixel/s versus 93.84 GPixel/s for the N1X 40SM.

Q: Do both GPUs support standard graphics APIs?

A: No. The RTX 4080 Max-Q supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1X 40SM lists all three APIs as "N/A" in the database, indicating no recorded support for these standard graphics interfaces.

Q: What is the process node and die size for each GPU?

A: Both GPUs are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has a die size of 294 mm², while the N1X 40SM has a larger die at 382 mm². The RTX 4080 Max-Q contains 35,800 million transistors, while the N1X 40SM transistor count is listed as unknown.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits the two GPUs across distinct performance categories. The N1X 40SM dominates in compute throughput and texture processing. Its FP32 output of 24.02 TFLOPS exceeds the RTX 4080 Max-Q by roughly 3.98 TFLOPS, a 19.9% advantage. The texture rate gap is even more pronounced: 750.7 GTexel/s versus 313.2 GTexel/s, a 437.5 GTexel/s difference that represents a 2.4x multiplier. These figures indicate the N1X 40SM is built for raw shader and texture-bound workloads.

The RTX 4080 Max-Q counters with advantages in memory bandwidth, pixel throughput, and API compatibility. Its 432.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is 58.2% higher than the 273.2 GB/s of the N1X 40SM. The pixel rate of 108.0 GPixel/s beats the 93.84 GPixel/s of the N1X 40SM by 14.16 GPixel/s, a 15.1% margin. The RTX 4080 Max-Q also carries full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, whereas the N1X 40SM records no API support in the database.

The RTX 4080 Max-Q has a higher shading unit count at 7424 versus 5120 for the N1X 40SM, yet the N1X 40SM still achieves higher FP32 throughput due to its much higher boost clock. The N1X 40SM boosts to 2346 MHz, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q boosts to 1350 MHz. The N1X 40SM also has more texture mapping units (320 versus 232) and more RT cores (40 versus 58, so the RTX 4080 Max-Q leads there). Tensor cores favor the RTX 4080 Max-Q at 232 versus 160.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different architectural branches from NVIDIA. The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses Ada Lovelace, the architecture behind the GeForce 40-series mobile lineup. Its chip is the AD104, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 294 mm² and 35,800 million transistors. The transistor density works out to 121.8 million per square millimeter.

The N1X 40SM uses Blackwell 2.0, a newer architecture designated for the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. Its chip is the GB20B, also on a 5 nm TSMC process, but with a larger die at 382 mm². The database lists transistor count and transistor density as unknown for this chip.

The core configurations differ substantially. The RTX 4080 Max-Q packs 7424 shading units, 232 texture mapping units, 80 ROPs, 58 RT cores, and 232 tensor cores. The N1X 40SM has 5120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, 40 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores. The N1X 40SM allocates more of its silicon to texture units, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q devotes more to shading units, ROPs, and dedicated ray tracing and tensor hardware.

The bus interface also differs: the RTX 4080 Max-Q uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the N1X 40SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent" for the RTX 4080 Max-Q, while the N1X 40SM lists a single HDMI output. Both are integrated-class parts with a slot width of IGP and no power connectors.

Specification Differences

The clock speeds show a notable divergence. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has a base clock of 795 MHz and a boost clock of 1350 MHz. The N1X 40SM has a lower base clock at 741 MHz but a much higher boost clock at 2346 MHz. The memory clock also differs: 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the RTX 4080 Max-Q versus 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) for the N1X 40SM.

Memory configuration is a clear differentiator. The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The N1X 40SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, yielding 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The N1X 40SM has over 10 times the capacity but 36.8% less bandwidth.

The compute rates show the N1X 40SM leading in FP32 and FP16 at 24.02 TFLOPS each, versus 20.04 TFLOPS each for the RTX 4080 Max-Q. The texture rate strongly favors the N1X 40SM at 750.7 GTexel/s versus 313.2 GTexel/s. The pixel rate favors the RTX 4080 Max-Q at 108.0 GPixel/s versus 93.84 GPixel/s.

Power and physical specifications also differ. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has a listed TDP of 60 W, while the N1X 40SM has an unknown TDP. Both are IGP slot width with no power connectors. The release dates are nearly three years apart: January 2, 2023 for the RTX 4080 Max-Q and May 31, 2026 for the N1X 40SM. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has a predecessor in the GeForce 30 Mobile and a successor in the GeForce 50 Mobile; the N1X 40SM has neither listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for these two GPUs, and neither has recorded average benchmark scores or nearest rival data. The comparison must rely entirely on the specification-level performance metrics recorded for each part.

The largest single-specification win for the N1X 40SM is texture rate. At 750.7 GTexel/s, it delivers 437.5 GTexel/s more than the RTX 4080 Max-Q, a 2.4x advantage. This is the most lopsided metric in the comparison and indicates the N1X 40SM is heavily optimized for texture-bound rendering paths.

The FP32 compute gap favors the N1X 40SM by 3.98 TFLOPS, from 24.02 TFLOPS down to 20.04 TFLOPS. The FP16 figures mirror this exactly at the same 1:1 ratio. These compute advantages come despite the N1X 40SM having 2,304 fewer shading units, which shows the effect of its 2346 MHz boost clock versus the 1350 MHz of the RTX 4080 Max-Q.

The RTX 4080 Max-Q takes its biggest win in memory bandwidth. Its 432.0 GB/s exceeds the N1X 40SM by 158.8 GB/s, a 58.2% margin. This bandwidth advantage is coupled with a faster memory clock and a narrower bus, indicating a different memory architecture philosophy.

Pixel rate is a second win for the RTX 4080 Max-Q. At 108.0 GPixel/s, it outperforms the N1X 40SM's 93.84 GPixel/s by 14.16 GPixel/s, a 15.1% advantage. This is directly tied to its higher ROP count of 80 versus 40.

The RTX 4080 Max-Q also leads in RT core count (58 versus 40) and tensor core count (232 versus 160). These hardware resources support its full DirectX 12 Ultimate feature set, which the N1X 40SM does not record. The combination of higher ROPs, higher memory bandwidth, and dedicated RT and tensor hardware gives the RTX 4080 Max-Q a well-rounded feature profile despite its lower raw compute.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a role separation between these two parts. The N1X 40SM is the compute and texture specialist. It delivers 19.9% more FP32 throughput and 2.4x the texture rate, making it the stronger choice for workloads that stress raw shader execution and texel fetching. Its 128 GB memory capacity is an order of magnitude larger than the RTX 4080 Max-Q, which suits capacity-hungry applications. The tradeoff is a 36.8% bandwidth deficit and no recorded support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan.

The RTX 4080 Max-Q is the graphics-focused part. It has 58.2% more memory bandwidth, 15.1% higher pixel throughput, and 2.1x more ROPs. It also carries the full modern API stack with DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores outnumber the N1X 40SM by 18 and 72 respectively, indicating stronger dedicated ray tracing and AI acceleration hardware. The 60 W TDP is explicitly recorded, giving a known power envelope.

For general graphics rendering, the RTX 4080 Max-Q is the better fit based on API support, pixel throughput, and bandwidth. For pure compute density and texture throughput, the N1X 40SM is superior. Neither part has recorded benchmark scores or rival comparisons in the database, so these conclusions derive from the specification-level metrics alone. The choice between them depends entirely on whether the workload prioritizes the N1X 40SM's FP32 and texture dominance or the RTX 4080 Max-Q's memory bandwidth, pixel rate, and graphics API compatibility.