NVIDIA H100 CNX vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the NVIDIA H100 CNX and the NVIDIA N1 16SM shows no direct head-to-head benchmark results. The database lists zero wins for either GPU in comparative testing, and the average benchmark score for both entries is zero. This absence of measured performance data means the comparison must rely entirely on architectural specifications, memory subsystems, and compute capabilities as recorded in the database.

The H100 CNX delivers 53.84 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the N1 16SM provides 9.609 TFLOPS. That puts the H100 CNX approximately 5.6 times ahead in single-precision floating-point throughput. In FP16 calculations, the H100 CNX reaches 215.4 TFLOPS using a 4:1 ratio, whereas the N1 16SM maintains 9.609 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The disparity in half-precision performance is even more pronounced, with the H100 CNX offering roughly 22.4 times the FP16 throughput.

Texture rate follows a similar pattern. The H100 CNX processes 841.3 GTexel/s, compared to 300.3 GTexel/s for the N1 16SM, a lead of 2.8 times. Pixel rate tells a different story, the N1 16SM reaches 56.30 GPixel/s, while the H100 CNX manages 44.28 GPixel/s. This gives the N1 16SM a 1.27 times advantage in pixel throughput, a notable inversion given the H100 CNX's overwhelming lead in other compute metrics.

Memory bandwidth heavily favors the H100 CNX. The H100 CNX uses 80 GB of HBM2e across a 5120-bit bus, delivering 2.04 TB/s. The N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, yielding 273.2 GB/s. The H100 CNX thus provides 7.5 times the memory bandwidth of the N1 16SM. However, the N1 16SM holds 1.6 times more memory capacity, which matters for workloads that require large resident datasets rather than rapid streaming.

Clock speeds show the N1 16SM running higher frequencies. The N1 16SM boosts to 2346 MHz, while the H100 CNX boosts to 1845 MHz. Base clocks are closer, with the N1 16SM at 741 MHz and the H100 CNX at 690 MHz. The N1 16SM also has a faster effective memory clock at 8.5 Gbps, versus 3.2 Gbps for the H100 CNX, though the HBM2e bus width compensates to create the bandwidth advantage.

Shader resources differ substantially. The H100 CNX contains 14,592 shading units, 456 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The N1 16SM has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. Tensor core counts also diverge, with the H100 CNX carrying 456 tensor cores and the N1 16SM carrying 64. Both GPUs include ray tracing capabilities in the N1 16SM with 16 RT cores, while the H100 CNX lists no RT core count in the database, indicating a server-focused design without dedicated ray tracing hardware.

The Verdict

Benchmark results indicate a clear split in intended roles. The H100 CNX is a high-throughput compute accelerator built for data center workloads. Its FP32 output of 53.84 TFLOPS, FP16 output of 215.4 TFLOPS, and 2.04 TB/s memory bandwidth position it for large-scale parallel computation, AI training, and scientific simulation. The N1 16SM, with 9.609 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16, targets different tasks entirely, likely integrated graphics processing within a Blackwell IGP package.

The N1 16SM wins on memory capacity with 128 GB versus 80 GB, on pixel rate with 56.30 GPixel/s versus 44.28 GPixel/s, and on boost clock at 2346 MHz versus 1845 MHz. These advantages point toward workloads that need large memory pools or high fill rates. The H100 CNX wins decisively on raw compute throughput, texture rate, and memory bandwidth, which are the metrics that dominate heavy parallel processing.

For users selecting between these two, the data suggests the H100 CNX for compute-bound tasks where FP32 or FP16 performance dictates execution time. The N1 16SM appears suited for situations where memory footprint exceeds 80 GB, or where pixel throughput takes priority. Neither GPU shows any recorded benchmark scores, so real-world validation remains absent from the database. The percentile ranking for both is 50, placing each at the median of all GPUs tracked, though this metric carries little weight without actual performance measurements.

Where Each One Wins

The H100 CNX dominates in compute density. Its 53.84 TFLOPS FP32 rating means it processes single-precision workloads far faster than the N1 16SM's 9.609 TFLOPS. For FP16 tasks, the H100 CNX extends that lead to 215.4 TFLOPS, making it the clear choice for mixed-precision training or inference loops. The 456 tensor cores versus 64 tensor cores reinforces this, as tensor operations scale with core count.

Memory bandwidth is another H100 CNX stronghold. At 2.04 TB/s, it can feed data to its compute units at a rate that the N1 16SM's 273.2 GB/s cannot approach. This matters for matrix multiplications and convolution operations that repeatedly read and write large data arrays. The H100 CNX also has a wider memory bus at 5120 bits versus 256 bits, which directly enables its bandwidth advantage.

Texture processing favors the H100 CNX as well, with 841.3 GTexel/s versus 300.3 GTexel/s. The higher TMU count of 456 versus 128 explains this gap. Workloads that sample textures heavily, such as certain rendering pipelines, would see faster execution on the H100 CNX.

The N1 16SM wins where capacity and output rate matter more than raw throughput. Its 128 GB memory pool exceeds the H100 CNX's 80 GB, allowing larger models or datasets to reside on-chip without swapping. Pixel rate of 56.30 GPixel/s tops the H100 CNX's 44.28 GPixel/s, which could benefit display output or framebuffer-heavy operations. The N1 16SM's boost clock of 2346 MHz also gives it a per-cycle advantage, which helps in latency-sensitive tasks that cannot fully utilize massive parallel arrays.

The N1 16SM includes 16 RT cores, which the H100 CNX lacks entirely. Any workload involving ray tracing would require the N1 16SM, though the database does not list API support for either GPU, as DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan fields are null for both.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA H100 CNX delivers 53.84 TFLOPS in FP32, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM provides 9.609 TFLOPS. The H100 CNX is approximately 5.6 times faster in single-precision compute.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two?

A: The N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory, whereas the H100 CNX has 80 GB of HBM2e. The N1 16SM offers 1.6 times more capacity.

Q: How do memory bandwidths compare?

A: The H100 CNX reaches 2.04 TB/s over a 5120-bit bus, while the N1 16SM reaches 273.2 GB/s over a 256-bit bus. The H100 CNX provides 7.5 times the bandwidth.

Q: Does the N1 16SM have ray tracing cores?

A: Yes, the N1 16SM lists 16 RT cores. The H100 CNX does not list any RT cores in the database.

Q: What are the tensor core counts?

A: The H100 CNX has 456 tensor cores, while the N1 16SM has 64 tensor cores.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The N1 16SM boosts to 2346 MHz, compared to 1845 MHz for the H100 CNX. The N1 16SM also has a higher base clock at 741 MHz versus 690 MHz.

Architecture Differences

The H100 CNX uses the GH100 chip based on the Hopper architecture, belonging to the Server Hopper generation. The N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip based on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, within the Blackwell IGP generation. Both are manufactured by NVIDIA at TSMC on a 5 nm process, but the underlying designs diverge significantly.

The H100 CNX packs 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 98.3 million per square millimeter. The N1 16SM has an unknown transistor count on a 382 mm² die, with no density figure recorded. The H100 CNX die is more than twice the size, which correlates with its higher shading unit count of 14,592 versus 2,048.

Memory technology differs completely. The H100 CNX employs HBM2e with a 5120-bit bus, a configuration optimized for maximum bandwidth. The N1 16SM uses LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, which trades bandwidth for capacity and integration simplicity. The H100 CNX supports effective memory speeds of 3.2 Gbps, while the N1 16SM runs at 8.5 Gbps effective, though the wider bus of the H100 CNX overcomes the clock deficit.

Form factor separates the two as well. The H100 CNX is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, requiring an 8-pin EPS power connector and a suggested 750 W power supply. The N1 16SM is an IGP, meaning it operates as an integrated graphics processor with no power connectors and no listed dimensions. The H100 CNX has no display outputs, while the N1 16SM includes one HDMI output.

Both use a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. The H100 CNX draws a TDP of 350 W, while the N1 16SM has an unknown TDP, consistent with its integrated nature. The H100 CNX was released in March 2023, and the N1 16SM is dated May 2026, indicating a newer design for the latter.

Specification Differences

The database records several fields where the two GPUs differ. Process node is identical at 5 nm, and both use TSMC as the foundry. Die size differs, with the H100 CNX at 814 mm² and the N1 16SM at 382 mm². Transistor count is 80,000 million for the H100 CNX and unknown for the N1 16SM.

Clock speeds show the N1 16SM ahead: base 741 MHz versus 690 MHz, boost 2346 MHz versus 1845 MHz. Effective memory clock favors the N1 16SM at 8.5 Gbps versus 3.2 Gbps. Memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all differ, with the H100 CNX using 80 GB HBM2e on 5120 bits at 2.04 TB/s, and the N1 16SM using 128 GB LPDDR5X on 256 bits at 273.2 GB/s.

Shading units total 14,592 for the H100 CNX and 2,048 for the N1 16SM. TMU counts are 456 versus 128. ROP counts are equal at 24. The H100 CNX has no listed RT cores, while the N1 16SM has 16. Tensor cores number 456 for the H100 CNX and 64 for the N1 16SM.

Pixel rate favors the N1 16SM at 56.30 GPixel/s versus 44.28 GPixel/s. Texture rate favors the H100 CNX at 841.3 GTexel/s versus 300.3 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 outputs are 53.84 TFLOPS and 215.4 TFLOPS for the H100 CNX, versus 9.609 TFLOPS for both on the N1 16SM.

TDP is 350 W for the H100 CNX and unknown for the N1 16SM. Slot width is dual-slot for the H100 CNX and IGP for the N1 16SM. Power connectors are present on the H100 CNX as 8-pin EPS, absent on the N1 16SM. Suggested PSU is 750 W for the H100 CNX, not listed for the N1 16SM. Display outputs are none for the H100 CNX and 1x HDMI for the N1 16SM. The H100 CNX has no API listings, while the N1 16SM lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A. Release dates are March 2023 for the H100 CNX and May 2026 for the N1 16SM.