AMD Radeon RX 7400 vs NVIDIA H20 NVL16 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon RX 7400 and the NVIDIA H20 NVL16. This absence is itself informative: the two products target entirely different segments of the GPU market, and their benchmark profiles reflect that divergence rather than any direct competition.

For the AMD Radeon RX 7400, the recorded measurements come from the PassMark suite and 3DMark. The strongest result is the PassMark G3D score of 11897, which places the card at the 17th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The DirectX 9 score of 176 is the highest among the DirectX tests, while DirectX 10 drops to 59, DirectX 11 reaches 97, and DirectX 12 falls to 44. The G2D score of 1209 and the GPU compute score of 5152 round out the picture. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test yields a score of 1103. The average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 2467.

The nearest rivals in the database for the RX 7400 are telling. The AMD Radeon 8040S sits 1.1% ahead with an average score of 2440. The NVIDIA GeForce 710M is 1.4% ahead at 2433, the Intel HD Graphics 610 is 1.8% ahead at 2425, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M is 1.9% ahead at 2422. These deltas are remarkably small, indicating that the RX 7400's average score of 2467 lands in a tightly clustered group of low-end and integrated graphics solutions. The RX 7400 actually edges past all four rivals on average score, but the margins are under two percentage points in every case.

The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has no benchmark entries in the database at all. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and there are no nearest rivals listed. The percentile figure of 50 places it at the median of all GPUs, but this percentile is not supported by any measured benchmark data in the database. The absence of scores means no direct numerical comparison can be drawn from measurements; any quantitative comparison must rely on architectural specifications rather than benchmark results.

The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and the win counts for both products are zero. This is not a case of one product dominating another in testing; it is a case where the database simply has no overlapping measurements. The RX 7400 has a full set of consumer-oriented DirectX and compute scores, while the H20 NVL16 has none. The H20 NVL16 is a server accelerator with no display outputs and no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API support recorded; it is not designed for the benchmark suites that the RX 7400 runs.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two products should never be cross-shopped. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 is a client-side graphics card with a 43 W TDP, a 6-pin power connector, and a recommended 200 W power supply. It uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. It operates over PCIe 4.0 x8 and provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. Its 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units deliver a pixel rate of 147.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 257.6 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput is 16.49 TFLOPS, and FP16 reaches 32.97 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio.

The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 is a server module with a 400 W TDP and a recommended 800 W power supply. It carries 96 GB of HBM3 memory on a 6144-bit bus with 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth. It uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and has no display outputs. Its 9984 shading units, 312 texture mapping units, and 24 render output units achieve a pixel rate of 47.52 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 617.8 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput is 39.54 TFLOPS, and FP16 reaches 79.07 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. It also includes 312 tensor cores, which the RX 7400 lacks entirely.

The H20 NVL16 delivers 2.4 times the FP32 throughput of the RX 7400 based on the recorded specifications. Its memory bandwidth of 4.03 TB/s is roughly 14 times the 288.0 GB/s of the RX 7400. Its memory capacity of 96 GB is 12 times the 8 GB on the RX 7400. These are not incremental differences; they are orders of magnitude apart in memory subsystem and compute scale.

The RX 7400 wins on efficiency in the narrow sense of power draw: 43 W versus 400 W is a 9.3 times difference. But the H20 NVL16 is not competing on that axis. The RX 7400 also wins on API compatibility for consumer workloads, supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the H20 NVL16 records N/A for all three. The RX 7400 is a dual-slot card; the H20 NVL16 is an SXM module.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon RX 7400: client rendering and legacy API coverage. The benchmark data shows DirectX 9 scoring 176, which is the highest of any DirectX test for this card. DirectX 11 scores 97, DirectX 10 scores 59, and DirectX 12 scores 44. The G2D score of 1209 indicates strong 2D performance relative to the 3D score of 11897. The RX 7400 supports the full consumer API stack: DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. It has display outputs for direct connection to monitors. For any workload that requires graphics output, legacy DirectX support, or a standard PCIe slot with a 6-pin power connector, the RX 7400 is the only one of the two that fits.

NVIDIA H20 NVL16: server compute, memory capacity, and bandwidth. The H20 NVL16 has 96 GB of HBM3 memory, which is 12 times the RX 7400's capacity. Memory bandwidth of 4.03 TB/s is approximately 14 times higher. The FP32 throughput of 39.54 TFLOPS is 2.4 times the RX 7400's 16.49 TFLOPS. FP16 throughput of 79.07 TFLOPS is 2.4 times the RX 7400's 32.97 TFLOPS. The 312 tensor cores are a feature class the RX 7400 does not offer at all. The H20 NVL16 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, double the interface width and one generation newer than the RX 7400's PCIe 4.0 x8. The SXM module form factor and 400 W TDP indicate a board designed for dense server integration, not desktop installation.

The production status of the H20 NVL16 is listed as Active, while the RX 7400 has no production status recorded. The H20 NVL16's release date is 2025-09-01, and the RX 7400's is 2025-08-07, making them near-contemporaneous releases, but the H20 NVL16 is a server product while the RX 7400 is a client product.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 records 39.54 TFLOPS, which is 2.4 times the AMD Radeon RX 7400's 16.49 TFLOPS.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The H20 NVL16 uses 96 GB of HBM3 on a 6144-bit bus with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth. The RX 7400 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The H20 NVL16 has 12 times the capacity and roughly 14 times the bandwidth.

Q: Does the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 support DirectX or OpenGL?

A: No. The database records DirectX as N/A and OpenGL as N/A for the H20 NVL16. The RX 7400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to the AMD Radeon RX 7400 in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon 8040S is 1.1% ahead with an average score of 2440, the NVIDIA GeForce 710M is 1.4% ahead at 2433, the Intel HD Graphics 610 is 1.8% ahead at 2425, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M is 1.9% ahead at 2422. The RX 7400's average score of 2467 is higher than all four, but the margins are under 2%.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has 312 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 has no tensor cores recorded.

Q: What is the power requirement difference?

A: The RX 7400 has a TDP of 43 W and a suggested power supply of 200 W. The H20 NVL16 has a TDP of 400 W and a suggested power supply of 800 W.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families with different process nodes. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 uses the Navi 33 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. It is fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm process. The chip contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². It belongs to the Navi III generation within the Radeon RX 7000 series, with Navi II as its predecessor and Navi IV as its successor.

The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 uses the GH100 chip built on Hopper architecture. It is also fabricated by TSMC, but on a 5 nm process. The chip contains 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 98.3M per mm². It belongs to the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation, with Server Ada as its predecessor and Server Blackwell as its successor. The production status is Active.

The transistor counts differ by a factor of approximately 6. The die size of the GH100 is 4 times the Navi 33 die. The transistor density of the GH100 is 1.5 times that of the Navi 33, reflecting the denser 5 nm process.

Clock speeds also differ. The RX 7400 has a base clock of 1452 MHz, a game clock of 2200 MHz, and a boost clock of 2300 MHz. Its memory runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate. The H20 NVL16 has a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 1980 MHz, with no game clock recorded. Its memory runs at 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective data rate. The H20's lower boost clock relative to its base clock suggests a sustained server workload profile, while the RX 7400's higher boost and game clocks indicate a client rendering focus.

The shading unit counts differ substantially. The RX 7400 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The H20 NVL16 has 9984 shading units, 312 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The H20 has 5.6 times the shading units and 2.8 times the TMUs, but the RX 7400 has 2.7 times the ROPs. The pixel rate reflects this: the RX 7400 achieves 147.2 GPixel/s versus 47.52 GPixel/s for the H20, a 3.1 times advantage for the AMD part. The texture rate favors the H20 at 617.8 GTexel/s versus 257.6 GTexel/s, a 2.4 times advantage.

The memory bus widths are dramatically different. The RX 7400 uses a 128-bit bus with 8 GB of GDDR6. The H20 NVL16 uses a 6144-bit bus with 96 GB of HBM3. The H20's bus is 48 times wider, which is why its bandwidth of 4.03 TB/s is roughly 14 times the RX 7400's 288.0 GB/s despite the H20's lower effective memory clock.

The RX 7400 has 28 ray tracing cores. The H20 NVL16 has no ray tracing cores recorded, but it has 312 tensor cores. The RX 7400 has no tensor cores. The H20 NVL16's API support is entirely absent for graphics standards, while the RX 7400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The form factors differ completely. The RX 7400 is a dual-slot card with a 1x 6-pin power connector and a suggested 200 W power supply. The H20 NVL16 is an SXM module with no power connectors listed and a suggested 800 W power supply. The RX 7400 provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The H20 NVL16 provides no display outputs. The RX 7400 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the H20 NVL16 uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

The release dates are close: the RX 7400 launched on 2025-08-07 and the H20 NVL16 on 2025-09-01. Both are produced by TSMC, but on different nodes (6 nm for AMD, 5 nm for NVIDIA). The architectural split between RDNA 3.0 and Hopper reflects fundamentally different design goals: the RX 7400 is a low-power client renderer, and the H20 NVL16 is a high-bandwidth server compute accelerator.