NVIDIA H100 CNX vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architecture differences between the NVIDIA H100 CNX and the NVIDIA N1 20SM?

A: The H100 CNX uses the GH100 chip built on the Hopper architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die. The N1 20SM uses the GB20B chip on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, also at 5 nm on TSMC, but with a 382 mm² die and an unknown transistor count.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The H100 CNX has 80 GB of HBM2e memory on a 5120-bit bus, delivering 2.04 TB/s of bandwidth. The N1 20SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s. The H100 CNX has a much wider bus and far higher bandwidth, while the N1 20SM has more total capacity.

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The H100 CNX delivers 53.84 TFLOPS FP32 and 215.4 TFLOPS FP16 (4:1), while the N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.01 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1). The H100 CNX leads by a substantial margin in both precision formats.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The H100 CNX has a base clock of 690 MHz and a boost clock of 1845 MHz. The N1 20SM has a higher base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The N1 20SM boosts significantly higher.

Q: How do the form factors and power requirements differ?

A: The H100 CNX is a dual-slot card with an 8-pin EPS power connector and a 350 W TDP, requiring a 750 W suggested PSU. The N1 20SM is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors and an unknown TDP.

Q: Which GPU has ray tracing capabilities?

A: Only the N1 20SM has ray tracing cores, with 20 RT cores. The H100 CNX lists no RT cores in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two NVIDIA parts diverge sharply at the architectural level. The H100 CNX is built on the Hopper architecture (chip GH100), a dedicated server accelerator from the Server Hopper generation. It uses 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 98.3M per mm². The N1 20SM, by contrast, is a Blackwell 2.0 part (chip GB20B) from the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation, with a 382 mm² die and an unknown transistor count. Both are fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process, but the design philosophies differ completely.

The H100 CNX packs 14,592 shading units, 456 TMUs, and 456 tensor cores, with no RT cores listed. The N1 20SM has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 80 tensor cores, and 20 RT cores. The H100 CNX is clearly optimized for massive parallel compute, while the N1 20SM balances compute with graphics features like ray tracing.

Memory architecture also separates them. The H100 CNX uses HBM2e with an 80 GB capacity on a 5120-bit bus, achieving 2.04 TB/s bandwidth. The N1 20SM uses LPDDR5X with 128 GB on a 256-bit bus, achieving 273.2 GB/s. The H100 CNX's memory bandwidth is roughly 7.5 times higher, which aligns with its server-class role. The N1 20SM's larger capacity but narrower bus suggests a different workload profile, favoring capacity over raw throughput.

Clock behavior differs as well. The H100 CNX has a 690 MHz base and 1845 MHz boost, while the N1 20SM has a 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost. The N1 20SM's significantly higher boost clock partially compensates for its lower core count in frequency-sensitive tasks. However, the H100 CNX's sheer core count and memory bandwidth dominate absolute throughput.

The H100 CNX is a dual-slot add-in card with an 8-pin EPS connector and a 350 W TDP, while the N1 20SM is an IGP with no power connectors and an unknown TDP. The H100 CNX has no display outputs, while the N1 20SM has 1x HDMI. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 interfaces. The H100 CNX is 267 mm long and 111 mm tall; the N1 20SM has no listed dimensions.

Where Each One Wins

The H100 CNX wins decisively in compute-heavy workloads that demand raw throughput. Its FP32 performance of 53.84 TFLOPS is more than 4 times the N1 20SM's 12.01 TFLOPS. FP16 performance is even more lopsided: 215.4 TFLOPS versus 12.01 TFLOPS. Texture rate favors the H100 CNX at 841.3 GTexel/s versus 375.4 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth is another major win for the H100 CNX at 2.04 TB/s versus 273.2 GB/s. Any task that saturates memory, such as large matrix operations or data-intensive inference, will strongly favor the H100 CNX.

The N1 20SM wins in specific areas that matter for its IGP form factor. Its pixel rate of 56.30 GPixel/s is higher than the H100 CNX's 44.28 GPixel/s, indicating better rasterization throughput per clock. The N1 20SM also has ray tracing cores, which the H100 CNX lacks entirely. Its boost clock of 2346 MHz is substantially higher, helping in latency-sensitive workloads that do not scale perfectly with core count. The N1 20SM also offers 128 GB of memory, which is 48 GB more than the H100 CNX, benefiting workloads that need large resident datasets.

The N1 20SM also wins on power efficiency from a system perspective. As an IGP with no power connectors and an unknown TDP, it integrates into a platform without discrete power requirements. The H100 CNX demands a 350 W TDP and a 750 W suggested PSU. For dense or embedded systems, the N1 20SM's integration is a clear advantage.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The H100 CNX uses the GH100 chip, while the N1 20SM uses GB20B. The H100 CNX is on Hopper architecture; the N1 20SM is on Blackwell 2.0. The H100 CNX has 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die with a density of 98.3M per mm²; the N1 20SM has an unknown transistor count on a 382 mm² die with no density listed.

Clocks differ: the H100 CNX runs at 690 MHz base and 1845 MHz boost, while the N1 20SM runs at 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the H100 CNX uses 1593 MHz with 3.2 Gbps effective, while the N1 20SM uses 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective.

Memory configuration is a major split. The H100 CNX has 80 GB of HBM2e on a 5120-bit bus with 2.04 TB/s bandwidth. The N1 20SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute units differ substantially. The H100 CNX has 14,592 shading units, 456 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 456 tensor cores, with no RT cores. The N1 20SM has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 80 tensor cores, and 20 RT cores. Pixel rate favors the N1 20SM at 56.30 GPixel/s versus 44.28 GPixel/s. Texture rate favors the H100 CNX at 841.3 GTexel/s versus 375.4 GTexel/s.

FP32 throughput is 53.84 TFLOPS on the H100 CNX versus 12.01 TFLOPS on the N1 20SM. FP16 throughput is 215.4 TFLOPS (4:1) on the H100 CNX versus 12.01 TFLOPS (1:1) on the N1 20SM.

Form factor and power differ entirely. The H100 CNX is dual-slot with an 8-pin EPS connector, 350 W TDP, and a 750 W suggested PSU. The N1 20SM is an IGP with no power connectors and an unknown TDP. The H100 CNX has no display outputs; the N1 20SM has 1x HDMI. The H100 CNX is 267 mm long and 111 mm high; the N1 20SM has no dimensions listed. The H100 CNX uses PCIe 5.0 x16; the N1 20SM also uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

Release dates differ as well: the H100 CNX launched on March 20, 2023, while the N1 20SM launched on May 31, 2026. The H100 CNX has a predecessor (Server Ada) and successor (Server Blackwell); the N1 20SM lists neither.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database shows no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for these two GPUs, and neither has an average benchmark score above zero. Both sit at the 50th percentile versus all GPUs in the database. This means direct performance comparisons must rely on the specification-level data rather than measured workloads.

The largest gap appears in FP16 compute. The H100 CNX delivers 215.4 TFLOPS, which is roughly 17.9 times the N1 20SM's 12.01 TFLOPS. This is the single biggest margin in any compute metric. In FP32, the H100 CNX's 53.84 TFLOPS is about 4.5 times the N1 20SM's 12.01 TFLOPS.

Memory bandwidth shows a similar disparity. The H100 CNX achieves 2.04 TB/s, about 7.5 times the N1 20SM's 273.2 GB/s. Texture rate favors the H100 CNX at 841.3 GTexel/s, about 2.2 times the N1 20SM's 375.4 GTexel/s.

The N1 20SM counters with a higher pixel rate of 56.30 GPixel/s versus 44.28 GPixel/s, a 27% advantage. It also has a higher boost clock of 2346 MHz versus 1845 MHz, a 27% advantage. The N1 20SM's 128 GB memory capacity is 60% larger than the H100 CNX's 80 GB.

Shading unit counts tell a similar story to compute throughput: the H100 CNX has 14,592 shading units versus 2,560 on the N1 20SM, a 5.7 times advantage. Tensor core counts are 456 versus 80, a 5.7 times advantage. The N1 20SM has 20 RT cores; the H100 CNX has none.

These specification gaps indicate that the H100 CNX is built for throughput at scale, while the N1 20SM is built for a more balanced, integrated profile. The lack of measured benchmarks in the database means the analysis rests on architectural and specification data, which strongly favors the H100 CNX in raw compute and memory bandwidth, while the N1 20SM holds advantages in pixel rate, clock speed, memory capacity, and ray tracing support.

The Verdict

The data points to two very different target use cases. The NVIDIA H100 CNX is a server-class accelerator with massive compute resources: 14,592 shading units, 456 tensor cores, 2.04 TB/s memory bandwidth, and FP32 throughput of 53.84 TFLOPS. It is built for workloads that demand extreme parallel processing and high memory throughput, such as large-scale training or inference. Its 350 W TDP and dual-slot form factor make it a discrete, power-hungry component for dedicated compute systems.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM is an integrated processor with a much smaller footprint. It has 2,560 shading units, 80 tensor cores, and 20 ray tracing cores. Its 2346 MHz boost clock is the highest in this comparison, and its 128 GB LPDDR5X memory offers more capacity than the H100 CNX. The N1 20SM's higher pixel rate of 56.30 GPixel/s and display output indicate a graphics-capable part, not a pure compute accelerator.

For users who need maximum FP32 or FP16 throughput, the H100 CNX is the clear choice. Its 53.84 TFLOPS FP32 and 215.4 TFLOPS FP16 dwarf the N1 20SM's 12.01 TFLOPS in both. For workloads that require large memory capacity, ray tracing, or an integrated form factor without discrete power requirements, the N1 20SM is the appropriate pick.

The database shows no benchmark wins for either part and no measured scores, so the verdict is based entirely on architecture and specifications. The H100 CNX wins on compute, bandwidth, and texture rate. The N1 20SM wins on pixel rate, clock speed, memory capacity, and ray tracing. Each part serves a distinct role, and the choice depends on whether the priority is raw throughput or integrated versatility.