NVIDIA H20 vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

The Verdict

The NVIDIA H20 and NVIDIA N1 16SM serve fundamentally different purposes within the server and integrated GPU landscape. The H20 is a Hopper-generation server accelerator built around the GH100 chip, designed for maximum compute throughput in data center environments. The N1 16SM is a Blackwell 2.0 integrated graphics processor using the GB20B chip, intended for systems where a separate discrete GPU is not required. The recorded data shows the H20 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 9.609 TFLOPS for the N1 16SM, a 4.1x advantage in raw compute. The H20 also carries 96 GB of HBM3 memory with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth, while the N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X with 273.2 GB/s. For compute-heavy server workloads, the H20 is the clear choice. For systems needing integrated graphics with display output and lower power integration, the N1 16SM fits that role. The database shows no benchmark wins for either part, as the head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and both sit at the 50th percentile versus all GPUs with an average benchmark score of zero.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA H20 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM provides 9.609 TFLOPS. The H20 is approximately 4.1 times faster in this metric.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The H20 uses 96 GB of HBM3 memory on a 6144-bit bus with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth. The N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The H20 has far greater bandwidth, while the N1 16SM has more capacity.

Q: Do both GPUs support display outputs?

A: No. The N1 16SM includes one HDMI output, while the H20 has no display outputs at all. The H20 is a server compute module without video output capability.

Q: What are the transistor and die size differences?

A: The H20 uses the GH100 chip with 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 98.3 million per mm². The N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip on a 382 mm² die, with transistor count listed as unknown.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and tensor cores?

A: The H20 has 9984 shading units and 312 tensor cores. The N1 16SM has 2048 shading units and 64 tensor cores. The H20 also has 312 texture mapping units versus 128 on the N1 16SM, while both have 24 ROPs.

Q: What are the clock speeds for each GPU?

A: The H20 has a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 1980 MHz. The N1 16SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. Despite the N1 16SM's higher boost clock, its lower core count results in substantially lower overall throughput.

Architecture Differences

The H20 is built on the Hopper architecture using the GH100 chip, while the N1 16SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB20B chip. Both are manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the chips differ dramatically in scale. The GH100 contains 80,000 million transistors across an 814 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 98.3 million per mm². The GB20B has a die size of 382 mm², less than half the H20's die, and its transistor count is not recorded in the database.

The H20 belongs to the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation, with its predecessor listed as Server Ada and successor as Server Blackwell. The N1 16SM belongs to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation, indicating its integrated graphics processor positioning. The two parts have no predecessor or successor overlap in the recorded data.

Tensor core counts differ significantly. The H20 has 312 tensor cores, while the N1 16SM has 64. The N1 16SM does include 16 ray tracing cores, a feature category that is null for the H20. Both parts list DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan APIs as N/A, meaning neither is intended for conventional graphics API workloads.

Memory technology separates these parts further. The H20 uses HBM3 with a 6144-bit bus, while the N1 16SM uses LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus. The H20's memory clock is 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective data rate, while the N1 16SM runs at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective. These architectural choices reflect the H20's focus on bandwidth-intensive compute versus the N1 16SM's integration into a system-on-chip design.

Specification Differences

The H20 and N1 16SM differ across nearly every recorded specification. The H20 uses the GH100 chip on Hopper architecture, while the N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip on Blackwell 2.0. Process nodes match at 5 nm from TSMC, but die sizes diverge sharply: 814 mm² for the H20 versus 382 mm² for the N1 16SM. Transistor counts are 80,000 million for the H20 and unknown for the N1 16SM.

Clock speeds show the H20 with a base of 1830 MHz and boost of 1980 MHz. The N1 16SM runs a base of 741 MHz and boost of 2346 MHz. Memory clocks also differ, with the H20 at 1313 MHz and 5.3 Gbps effective, and the N1 16SM at 1067 MHz and 8.5 Gbps effective.

Memory configuration favors the N1 16SM in capacity at 128 GB versus 96 GB, but the H20 dominates in bandwidth at 4.03 TB/s versus 273.2 GB/s. Bus widths are 6144 bits for the H20 and 256 bits for the N1 16SM. Memory types are HBM3 and LPDDR5X respectively.

Compute resources differ by large margins. The H20 has 9984 shading units, 312 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The N1 16SM has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. Tensor cores number 312 on the H20 and 64 on the N1 16SM. Ray tracing cores are absent from the H20's recorded data but present as 16 on the N1 16SM.

Pixel and texture rates reflect these differences. The H20 achieves 47.52 GPixel/s and 617.8 GTexel/s. The N1 16SM reaches 56.30 GPixel/s and 300.3 GTexel/s. The N1 16SM actually wins in pixel rate despite having the same 24 ROPs, due to its higher boost clock. The H20 wins decisively in texture rate.

FP16 performance shows another divergence. The H20 delivers 79.07 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, double its FP32 figure. The N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning no FP16 advantage. Power specifications list the H20 at 500 W with a suggested PSU of 900 W, while the N1 16SM's TDP is unknown with no suggested PSU recorded.

Form factors differ completely. The H20 uses an SXM Module slot width, while the N1 16SM is an IGP. The H20 has no power connectors listed, and the N1 16SM has none. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interfaces. Display outputs are absent on the H20 and include one HDMI on the N1 16SM. Release dates show the H20 launching on 2024-01-31 and the N1 16SM on 2026-05-31. Both are marked as Active in production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results between the NVIDIA H20 and the NVIDIA N1 16SM. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and the wins counter shows zero for both parts. Average benchmark scores are zero for each GPU, and the nearest rivals lists are also empty. With no direct comparison data available, the analysis relies on the recorded specification differences to establish relative performance.

The clearest performance indicator comes from FP32 compute. The H20's 39.54 TFLOPS is roughly 4.1 times the N1 16SM's 9.609 TFLOPS. This gap reflects the H20's 9984 shading units versus 2048 on the N1 16SM, a 4.9x core count advantage that is partially offset by the N1 16SM's higher boost clock of 2346 MHz versus 1980 MHz.

FP16 performance widens the gap further. The H20 reaches 79.07 TFLOPS due to its 2:1 FP16 ratio, while the N1 16SM stays at 9.609 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. That puts the H20 at 8.2 times the N1 16SM's FP16 throughput, a significant advantage for AI and machine learning workloads that rely on reduced precision.

Memory bandwidth presents another decisive margin. The H20's 4.03 TB/s is 14.8 times the N1 16SM's 273.2 GB/s. This difference stems from the HBM3 memory type on a 6144-bit bus versus LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus. For memory-bound workloads, the H20 has an overwhelming advantage.

Texture rate also favors the H20 at 617.8 GTexel/s versus 300.3 GTexel/s, a 2.1x difference. Pixel rate is the one metric where the N1 16SM leads, achieving 56.30 GPixel/s versus 47.52 GPixel/s, a 1.18x advantage driven by its higher boost clock and equal ROP count.

The N1 16SM also holds an advantage in memory capacity at 128 GB versus 96 GB, a 1.33x difference. This could matter for workloads that require large datasets resident in memory, though the H20's vastly superior bandwidth may compensate in many scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA H20 wins in every compute-intensive category recorded in the database. Its FP32 performance of 39.54 TFLOPS is 4.1 times the N1 16SM's 9.609 TFLOPS. Its FP16 performance of 79.07 TFLOPS is 8.2 times the N1 16SM's 9.609 TFLOPS. Memory bandwidth of 4.03 TB/s is 14.8 times the N1 16SM's 273.2 GB/s. Texture rate of 617.8 GTexel/s is 2.1 times the N1 16SM's 300.3 GTexel/s. The H20 also has 312 tensor cores versus 64, and 9984 shading units versus 2048. These figures position the H20 for server workloads where raw throughput is the primary requirement.

The H20's 500 W TDP with a 900 W suggested PSU indicates a power-hungry accelerator designed for data center deployment. Its SXM Module form factor and lack of display outputs confirm this orientation. The H20's release on 2024-01-31 places it earlier in the database timeline than the N1 16SM's 2026-05-31 release. The H20 also has a defined lineage with Server Ada as predecessor and Server Blackwell as successor.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM wins in several specific categories. Its memory capacity of 128 GB exceeds the H20's 96 GB by 1.33 times. Its pixel rate of 56.30 GPixel/s exceeds the H20's 47.52 GPixel/s by 1.18 times. Its boost clock of 2346 MHz is higher than the H20's 1980 MHz. It includes 16 ray tracing cores where the H20 has none recorded. It provides one HDMI display output while the H20 has none. Its IGP form factor and lack of power connectors indicate an integrated design that does not require external power delivery.

The N1 16SM's 1:1 FP16 ratio means it does not accelerate half-precision workloads beyond its FP32 rate, unlike the H20's 2:1 ratio. This makes the N1 16SM less suitable for AI inference or training workloads that rely on FP16 arithmetic. The N1 16SM's lower transistor count, as indicated by the unknown figure and smaller 382 mm² die, suggests a more power-efficient part suited for integrated deployments.

For use cases, the H20 suits compute servers, AI training clusters, and high-bandwidth data processing. The N1 16SM suits systems requiring integrated graphics with a display output, lower memory bandwidth needs, and larger memory capacity for dataset residency. Both parts lack conventional graphics API support with DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan listed as N/A. The database shows no benchmark wins for either GPU, so the specification differences provide the only basis for selection.