NVIDIA H20 vs NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct benchmark comparisons between the NVIDIA H20 and the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation. Both parts hold an identical percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs, and neither has an average benchmark score listed. With zero wins recorded for either side, the head-to-head data is effectively a blank slate. What can be compared directly are the raw throughput metrics and memory characteristics recorded in the specification sheets.

The H20 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is more than double the 15.62 TFLOPS from the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada. That gap is roughly 2.5 times in favor of the H20. The FP16 picture is even more lopsided: the H20 reaches 79.07 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the mobile part stays at 15.62 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The H20 therefore offers over five times the FP16 throughput. This difference matters for any workload that relies on reduced-precision arithmetic, such as AI inference or certain scientific simulations.

Memory bandwidth tells a similar story. The H20 uses HBM3 with a 6144-bit bus and reaches 4.03 TB/s. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada uses GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and reaches 256.0 GB/s. That is a factor of roughly 15.7 in favor of the H20. Capacity is also dramatically different: 96 GB versus 8 GB. For datasets that must reside in VRAM, the H20 holds twelve times as much data locally.

Texture and pixel rates split differently. The H20 posts 617.8 GTexel/s and 47.52 GPixel/s. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada posts 244.1 GTexel/s and 81.36 GPixel/s. The mobile part wins pixel throughput by about 1.7 times, while the H20 wins texture throughput by about 2.5 times. This reflects different architectural priorities, with the H20 tuned for compute-heavy server roles and the mobile chip optimized for graphics output.

Clock speeds also differ. The H20 runs at 1830 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada runs at 1395 MHz base and 1695 MHz boost. The H20 is about 31% higher at base clock and 17% higher at boost. Memory clocks are not directly comparable due to different memory types, but the effective rates are 5.3 Gbps for HBM3 and 16 Gbps for GDDR6.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA H20 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS compared to 15.62 TFLOPS from the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation. That makes the H20 roughly 2.5 times faster in single-precision floating-point workloads.

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The H20 comes with 96 GB of HBM3, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada has 8 GB of GDDR6. The H20 holds twelve times more data on-package, which is critical for large model inference or training batches that exceed 8 GB.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The H20 reaches 4.03 TB/s over a 6144-bit HBM3 interface. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada reaches 256.0 GB/s over a 128-bit GDDR6 interface. The H20 provides roughly 15.7 times more bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The H20 has a TDP of 500 W and lists a suggested PSU of 900 W. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada has a TDP of 115 W and does not list a suggested PSU, as it is an integrated graphics processor for portable devices.

Q: Which GPU supports newer PCIe?

A: The H20 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The H20 supports the newer generation interface.

Q: What is the transistor density of each chip?

A: The H20 uses the GH100 chip with 98.3 million transistors per mm². The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada uses the AD106 chip with 121.8 million transistors per mm². The AD106 packs transistors more densely despite being a smaller die.

Architecture Differences

The H20 is built on the Hopper architecture using the GH100 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The die measures 814 mm² and contains 80,000 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 98.3M per mm². The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using the AD106 chip, also on a 5 nm process at TSMC. Its die is 188 mm² with 22,900 million transistors, giving a density of 121.8M per mm². The AD106 is roughly 4.3 times smaller in die area but packs transistors more densely.

Shader resources differ substantially. The H20 has 9,984 shading units, 312 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada has 4,608 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The H20 has more than double the shaders and TMUs, but the mobile part has double the ROPs. Tensor core counts are 312 for the H20 and 144 for the mobile part. The H20 does not list dedicated RT cores, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada has 36 RT cores.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The H20 uses HBM3 with a 6144-bit bus, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada uses GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus. The memory clock is 1313 MHz (5.3 Gbps effective) for the H20 and 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for the mobile part. The H20's memory bandwidth of 4.03 TB/s dwarfs the 256.0 GB/s of the mobile part.

API support also diverges. The H20 lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A, reflecting its server-oriented design with no display outputs. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and its display outputs are portable-device dependent.

Form factors are polar opposites. The H20 is an SXM module, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada is an IGP. The H20 has no display outputs; the mobile part depends on the host portable device for display connectivity. The H20 has no listed power connectors and relies on the SXM socket, while the mobile part has no power connectors at all.

The Verdict

The data points to two different roles. The H20 is a server accelerator built for massive compute and memory bandwidth. It offers 39.54 TFLOPS FP32, 79.07 TFLOPS FP16, 96 GB of HBM3, and 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada is a mobile graphics processor with 15.62 TFLOPS FP32, 8 GB of GDDR6, and 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its strengths lie in pixel throughput, API support, and portability.

The H20 should be selected for workloads that need large memory capacity, extreme bandwidth, and high FP16 throughput. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada should be selected for portable systems requiring graphics output, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and lower power draw. The H20 operates at 500 W, while the mobile part runs at 115 W. The H20 is released later (2024-01-31) compared to the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada (2023-03-20). Neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database. The H20 is in the Server Hopper generation, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada is in the Ada-MW generation. The H20's predecessor is Server Ada and its successor is Server Blackwell. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada's predecessor is Ampere-MW and its successor is Blackwell-MW.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: GH100 (H20) versus AD106 (RTX 3000 Mobile Ada)
• Architecture: Hopper versus Ada Lovelace
• Generation: Server Hopper (Hxx) versus Ada-MW
• Transistors: 80,000 million versus 22,900 million
• Die Size: 814 mm² versus 188 mm²
• Transistor Density: 98.3M / mm² versus 121.8M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1830 MHz versus 1395 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1980 MHz versus 1695 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1313 MHz (5.3 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: 96 GB versus 8 GB
• Memory Type: HBM3 versus GDDR6
• Memory Bus Width: 6144 bit versus 128 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 4.03 TB/s versus 256.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: 9,984 versus 4,608
• TMUs: 312 versus 144
• ROPs: 24 versus 48
• RT Cores: not listed versus 36
• Tensor Cores: 312 versus 144
• Pixel Rate: 47.52 GPixel/s versus 81.36 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 617.8 GTexel/s versus 244.1 GTexel/s
• FP32: 39.54 TFLOPS versus 15.62 TFLOPS
• FP16: 79.07 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 15.62 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 500 W versus 115 W
• Slot Width: SXM Module versus IGP
• Power Connectors: not listed versus None
• Suggested PSU: 900 W versus not listed
• Bus Interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display Outputs: No outputs versus Portable Device Dependent
• DirectX: N/A versus 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• OpenGL: N/A versus 4.6
• Vulkan: N/A versus 1.4
• Release Date: 2024-01-31 versus 2023-03-20
• Predecessor: Server Ada versus Ampere-MW
• Successor: Server Blackwell versus Blackwell-MW

Where Each One Wins

The H20 wins clearly in compute throughput. It delivers 2.5 times the FP32 performance and over 5 times the FP16 performance. It also dominates memory capacity and bandwidth, offering 12 times the VRAM and roughly 15.7 times the bandwidth. Texture rate is 2.5 times higher. For any server workload that scales with raw compute or memory bandwidth, the H20 is the stronger choice.

The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada wins in pixel throughput, delivering 81.36 GPixel/s versus 47.52 GPixel/s. It also supports the full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 APIs, while the H20 lists N/A for all. The mobile part has 36 RT cores, which the H20 does not list. The mobile part also has a higher transistor density at 121.8M / mm², and it consumes far less power at 115 W versus 500 W. Its smaller die and IGP form factor make it suitable for portable devices, whereas the H20 requires an SXM module with a 900 W suggested PSU.

For graphics-oriented tasks with rasterization and ray tracing, the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada is the only one of the two with relevant API support and display outputs. For compute-heavy, memory-bound server tasks, the H20 is the only viable option given its 96 GB capacity and 4.03 TB/s bandwidth. The choice depends entirely on the workload environment, not on any overlap in capability.