NVIDIA H100 PCIe 96 GB vs NVIDIA H20 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the NVIDIA H100 PCIe 96 GB or the NVIDIA H20. Both cards return an average benchmark score of zero, and neither has a list of nearest rivals to compare against. The head-to-head benchmark table is empty, and the win count for each card is zero. Without measured performance data, the analysis must rely entirely on the architectural and specification differences recorded in the database.

What the data does show is that both GPUs occupy the 50th percentile among all GPUs tracked in the database. This percentile ranking is identical for both parts, indicating that neither card has separated itself from the other in the database’s aggregate scoring system. The lack of benchmark entries means there are no exact deltas, no percentage leads, and no per-application wins to report. Any performance conclusions must be drawn from the physical and architectural specifications that are present.

The most significant numerical difference between the two cards lies in the memory subsystem. The H100 PCIe 96 GB uses a 5120-bit bus with 3.36 TB/s of bandwidth, while the H20 uses a wider 6144-bit bus with 4.03 TB/s. That is a 20% advantage in memory bandwidth for the H20, which is a direct consequence of the wider bus. Both cards use HBM3 memory at 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective speed, so the bandwidth gap comes entirely from the bus width.

Compute throughput tells the opposite story. The H100 PCIe 96 GB delivers 62.08 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 39.54 TFLOPS for the H20. That puts the H100 roughly 57% ahead in FP32. In FP16, the gap widens considerably: the H100 achieves 248.3 TFLOPS with a 4:1 ratio, while the H20 manages 79.07 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The H100 leads FP16 by more than 3x, and the ratio difference indicates the H100 processes half-precision at a much higher throughput per clock.

Clock speeds favor the H20. Its base clock is 1830 MHz and boost clock is 1980 MHz, versus 1665 MHz base and 1837 MHz boost for the H100. The H20 runs about 10% higher at base and about 8% higher at boost. This higher clock rate helps the H20 close some of the compute gap, but not enough to overcome the H100’s much larger shader count.

The shading unit count is decisively in the H100’s favor. The H100 has 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 528 tensor cores. The H20 has 9,984 shading units, 312 TMUs, and 312 tensor cores. The H100 has 69% more shading units, 69% more TMUs, and 69% more tensor cores. Both cards have 24 ROPs. The texture rate reflects this: the H100 posts 969.9 GTexel/s versus 617.8 GTexel/s for the H20, a 57% lead. The pixel rate slightly favors the H20 at 47.52 GPixel/s versus 44.09 GPixel/s, driven by the higher clock speed.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same GH100 chip, the Hopper architecture, a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die. The transistor density is identical at 98.3M per mm². Both are generation "Server Hopper (Hxx)" parts, share the same predecessor (Server Ada) and successor (Server Blackwell), and both have active production status. The architectural foundation is therefore the same; the differences come from how the chip is configured and utilized.

The H100 PCIe 96 GB uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface and is a dual-slot card measuring 268 mm in length and 111 mm in height. It draws 700 W of power and requires a suggested 1100 W power supply, using an 8-pin EPS connector. The H20 also uses PCIe 5.0 x16 but is an SXM module with no recorded dimensions. Its power draw is lower at 500 W, with a suggested 900 W power supply. The H20 has no power connector listed, consistent with an SXM form factor that receives power through the socket.

Memory capacity is identical at 96 GB of HBM3 on both cards. The bus width differs, as noted: 5120 bit for the H100 versus 6144 bit for the H20. Both run memory at 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective, but the wider bus gives the H20 its 4.03 TB/s bandwidth advantage. Neither card has display outputs, and both are server-oriented parts with no graphics API support recorded (the H20 lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A).

The tensor core count follows the TMU count: 528 on the H100 versus 312 on the H20. This is a 69% difference in raw tensor core hardware. The FP16 ratio also differs, with the H100 using a 4:1 ratio and the H20 using a 2:1 ratio. This ratio indicates how the FP16 throughput is derived from the FP32 pipeline, and the higher ratio on the H100 reflects a more aggressive half-precision path. The H20’s 2:1 ratio means its FP16 output is exactly double its FP32 output, whereas the H100’s FP16 is four times its FP32.

The release dates differ substantially. The H100 PCIe 96 GB was released on 2023-03-20, while the H20 followed on 2024-01-31. Both retain the same generation and successor, indicating the H20 is a later derivative of the same Hopper generation rather than a new architecture.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct design targets. The H100 PCIe 96 GB is configured for maximum compute throughput. It leads in FP32 by 57%, in FP16 by more than 3x, in texture rate by 57%, and in shading units, TMUs, and tensor cores by 69% each. Its higher transistor utilization, reflected in the same die but more active shader cores, makes it the stronger compute part. The only compute metric where it trails is pixel rate, where the H20’s higher clock gives it a 7.8% edge, a minor factor for a server GPU with no display outputs.

The H20 is configured for memory-centric workloads. Its 4.03 TB/s bandwidth is 20% higher than the H100’s 3.36 TB/s, achieved through a 20% wider memory bus. It also runs at higher clocks, consumes 200 W less power (500 W versus 700 W), and requires a lower suggested power supply (900 W versus 1100 W). For applications that are bandwidth-limited rather than compute-limited, the H20’s wider bus and lower power envelope are the decisive factors.

The choice between the two depends on workload characteristics. The H100 PCIe 96 GB delivers substantially higher FP32 and FP16 throughput, making it the superior part for dense compute tasks where tensor core utilization dominates. The H20 delivers higher memory bandwidth and lower power draw, making it the stronger part for memory-bound workloads that cannot fully saturate the H100’s compute units.

Neither card has benchmark scores in the database, so the verdict rests on specifications. The H100 wins on raw compute, the H20 wins on memory bandwidth and efficiency. Since both share the same architecture, die, process, and memory type, the differentiation is purely in configuration: the H100 activates more of the chip’s compute resources, while the H20 activates fewer but runs them faster and pairs them with a wider memory interface.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA H20 has 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth from a 6144-bit bus, compared to 3.36 TB/s from a 5120-bit bus on the H100 PCIe 96 GB.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The H100 PCIe 96 GB delivers 62.08 TFLOPS of FP32, while the H20 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS, giving the H100 a 57% lead.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same chip?

A: Yes, both are based on the GH100 chip with the Hopper architecture, built on TSMC’s 5 nm process with 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The H100 PCIe 96 GB draws 700 W with a suggested 1100 W power supply, while the H20 draws 500 W with a suggested 900 W power supply.

Q: Which GPU has more tensor cores?

A: The H100 PCIe 96 GB has 528 tensor cores, compared to 312 on the H20, a 69% difference.

Q: What is the FP16 performance difference?

A: The H100 achieves 248.3 TFLOPS FP16 with a 4:1 ratio, while the H20 achieves 79.07 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, making the H100 more than 3x faster in FP16.

Where Each One Wins

The H100 PCIe 96 GB wins in every compute-heavy category recorded in the database. Its FP32 output of 62.08 TFLOPS is 57% higher than the H20’s 39.54 TFLOPS. Its FP16 output of 248.3 TFLOPS is over 3x the H20’s 79.07 TFLOPS. The texture rate of 969.9 GTexel/s is 57% ahead of 617.8 GTexel/s. The shading unit count of 16,896 versus 9,984, the TMU count of 528 versus 312, and the tensor core count of 528 versus 312 all favor the H100 by 69%. These figures indicate that the H100 is the appropriate part for applications that stress the compute pipeline, particularly those that can use the 4:1 FP16 ratio for dense half-precision work.

The H20 wins in memory bandwidth, clock speed, and power efficiency. Its 4.03 TB/s bandwidth is 20% higher than the H100’s 3.36 TB/s. Its base clock of 1830 MHz and boost clock of 1980 MHz are both higher than the H100’s 1665 MHz and 1837 MHz. The pixel rate of 47.52 GPixel/s is 7.8% higher than 44.09 GPixel/s. The power draw of 500 W is 28.6% lower than 700 W, and the suggested power supply is 900 W versus 1100 W. These characteristics suit memory-bound workloads where the wider bus can be fully utilized and where lower power consumption reduces system requirements.

The ROP count is identical at 24, so neither card wins on that front. Both have 96 GB of HBM3 memory, so capacity is not a differentiator. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16, so the host interface is the same. The H20’s SXM form factor versus the H100’s dual-slot PCIe card is a physical difference, but the database does not record performance implications for that choice.

For workloads that are limited by memory bandwidth, such as large-scale data movement or inference with large models, the H20’s 4.03 TB/s and lower power draw make it the more suitable option. For workloads that are limited by compute throughput, such as training dense models or running FP16-heavy operations, the H100’s 248.3 TFLOPS FP16 and 528 tensor cores make it the stronger choice. The data does not include per-application benchmarks, so the exact workload split cannot be quantified, but the specification deltas point clearly in these directions.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs in the database:

• Base clock: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 1665 MHz, H20 at 1830 MHz
• Boost clock: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 1837 MHz, H20 at 1980 MHz
• Memory bus width: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 5120 bit, H20 at 6144 bit
• Memory bandwidth: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 3.36 TB/s, H20 at 4.03 TB/s
• Shading units: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 16,896, H20 at 9,984
• TMUs: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 528, H20 at 312
• Tensor cores: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 528, H20 at 312
• Pixel rate: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 44.09 GPixel/s, H20 at 47.52 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 969.9 GTexel/s, H20 at 617.8 GTexel/s
• FP32: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 62.08 TFLOPS, H20 at 39.54 TFLOPS
• FP16: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 248.3 TFLOPS (4:1), H20 at 79.07 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 700 W, H20 at 500 W
• Slot width: H100 PCIe 96 GB is dual-slot, H20 is SXM Module
• Power connectors: H100 PCIe 96 GB uses 8-pin EPS, H20 has none listed
• Suggested PSU: H100 PCIe 96 GB at 1100 W, H20 at 900 W
• Dimensions: H100 PCIe 96 GB is 268 mm long and 111 mm high, H20 has no recorded dimensions
• Release date: H100 PCIe 96 GB on 2023-03-20, H20 on 2024-01-31
• APIs: H100 PCIe 96 GB has no API data recorded, H20 lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A

Fields that are identical include the chip (GH100), architecture (Hopper), process node (5 nm), foundry (TSMC), transistors (80,000 million), die size (814 mm²), transistor density (98.3M / mm²), memory size (96 GB), memory type (HBM3), memory clock (1313 MHz, 5.3 Gbps effective), ROPs (24), bus interface (PCIe 5.0 x16), display outputs (no outputs), production status (Active), predecessor (Server Ada), and successor (Server Blackwell).