NVIDIA H20 vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 72 GB Blackwell Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the NVIDIA H20 compare to the NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 72 GB Blackwell in raw FP32 compute?

A: The RTX PRO 5000 delivers 66.94 TFLOPS FP32, which is roughly 69% higher than the H20's 39.54 TFLOPS. This is a substantial gap in general-purpose compute throughput.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory capacity?

A: The NVIDIA H20 offers 96 GB of HBM3 memory, while the RTX PRO 5000 has 72 GB of GDDR7 memory. The H20's capacity advantage is 24 GB, or 33% more memory.

Q: What does the memory bandwidth comparison show?

A: The H20's HBM3 memory provides 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth over a 6144-bit bus, versus the RTX PRO 5000's 1.34 TB/s over a 384-bit bus. The H20 offers roughly three times the bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shader units?

A: The RTX PRO 5000 has 14,080 shading units, compared to 9,984 on the H20. That is a 41% advantage in shader count for the Blackwell card.

Q: Are both GPUs based on the same architecture?

A: No. The H20 uses the Hopper architecture with the GH100 chip, while the RTX PRO 5000 uses Blackwell 2.0 with the GB202 chip. Both are built on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Q: What is the recorded benchmark score for the RTX PRO 5000?

A: The RTX PRO 5000's average benchmark score is 6,407, placing it in the 37th percentile of all GPUs. Its best result is 24,310 in Passmark G3D, and its compute score is 15,667.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent distinct design philosophies within NVIDIA's recent lineup. The H20 is a Hopper-generation server module (GH100 chip) aimed at high-throughput data center workloads, while the RTX PRO 5000 is a Blackwell 2.0 workstation card (GB202 chip) with display outputs and a dual-slot form factor.

Fabrication details show both are produced on a 5 nm TSMC process, but the transistor counts differ. The RTX PRO 5000 packs 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, yielding a density of 122.9M transistors per mm². The H20 has 80,000 million transistors on a larger 814 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 98.3M per mm². This indicates the Blackwell chip uses a more compact layout.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The H20 uses HBM3 with a 6144-bit bus, achieving 4.03 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX PRO 5000 uses GDDR7 with a 384-bit bus and 1.34 TB/s. The H20's bus width is 16 times wider, and its bandwidth is roughly three times higher, which suits memory-bound server workloads. The RTX PRO 5000's GDDR7 operates at 28 Gbps effective, whereas the H20's HBM3 runs at 5.3 Gbps effective per pin, highlighting the different trade-offs between capacity, bandwidth, and latency.

Compute resources also diverge. The RTX PRO 5000 has 14,080 shading units, 440 texture mapping units, 160 ROPs, 110 RT cores, and 440 tensor cores. The H20 has 9,984 shading units, 312 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 312 tensor cores. The RTX PRO 5000's ROP count of 160 versus 24 is a 6.7x difference, which directly impacts pixel fill rate. Clock speeds show the H20 boosts to 1980 MHz while the RTX PRO 5000 boosts to 2377 MHz, a 20% higher boost clock for the Blackwell card.

Interface and power delivery also differ. The H20 is an SXM module with no display outputs, while the RTX PRO 5000 is a dual-slot card with 4x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. The H20 carries a 500 W TDP with a suggested 900 W PSU, while the RTX PRO 5000 consumes 300 W with a 700 W suggested PSU. The RTX PRO 5000 uses a single 16-pin power connector.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head benchmark data is not available in the database, so the comparison relies on recorded performance metrics for the RTX PRO 5000 and the architectural specifications of both cards. The RTX PRO 5000's average benchmark score is 6,407, which places it in the 37th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE and GTX 580M, both with an average score of 6,389 (a 0.3% delta), and the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile and NVIDIA Quadro M5000M, both scoring 6,476 and 6,481 respectively, which puts them 1.1% ahead of the RTX PRO 5000.

Within the RTX PRO 5000's own benchmark suite, the Passmark G3D test produced a score of 24,310, while the DirectX 11 test scored 219, DirectX 10 scored 175, DirectX 9 scored 311, DirectX 12 scored 78, and the G2D test scored 914. The GPU compute score is 15,667. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test yielded 9,579.5. These results show a wide spread between compute-heavy workloads and legacy DirectX performance, suggesting the card is optimized for modern graphics APIs and compute tasks.

The H20 has no recorded benchmarks in the database and an average benchmark score of 0, with a 50th percentile ranking. This makes direct performance comparisons impossible, but the FP32 compute figures provide a clear picture. The RTX PRO 5000's 66.94 TFLOPS FP32 exceeds the H20's 39.54 TFLOPS by 27.4 TFLOPS, a 69% advantage. In FP16, the H20 achieves 79.07 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the RTX PRO 5000 delivers 66.94 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). Here the H20 leads by 12.13 TFLOPS, or 18%, due to its dedicated FP16 acceleration path.

Pixel and texture rates reinforce the RTX PRO 5000's dominance in rasterization. The RTX PRO 5000's pixel rate is 380.3 GPixel/s versus 47.52 GPixel/s for the H20, a 700% difference. Texture rate is 1,045.9 GTexel/s versus 617.8 GTexel/s, a 69% advantage for the Blackwell card. These figures stem from the RTX PRO 5000's higher ROP and TMU counts combined with a higher boost clock.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear split in intended use cases. The RTX PRO 5000 is the superior choice for graphics-intensive workloads, with 69% higher FP32 compute, 700% higher pixel rate, and 69% higher texture rate compared to the H20. Its 14,080 shading units, 160 ROPs, and 110 RT cores make it a workstation card designed for rendering, visualization, and real-time graphics. The 4x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs confirm its role as a display-capable professional GPU.

The H20, by contrast, is a server module with no display outputs and a 500 W TDP, built for data center environments. Its 96 GB of HBM3 memory with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth, combined with FP16 throughput of 79.07 TFLOPS, positions it for memory-hungry AI inference and training workloads where memory capacity and bandwidth matter more than rasterization speed. Its 50th percentile ranking and lack of benchmark scores suggest the database has not yet captured its performance profile, but the specifications alone show a different optimization target.

Users who need to drive multiple displays, run modern DirectX 12 Ultimate or Vulkan 1.4 applications, and require high fill rates should select the RTX PRO 5000. Users who operate server racks, process large models in memory, and prioritize bandwidth over pixel throughput should choose the H20. The RTX PRO 5000's 6,407 average benchmark score and 37th percentile placement indicate it performs competitively within its peer group, while the H20's unmeasured status leaves its real-world standing open to question.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measured specification. The H20 uses the GH100 chip with Hopper architecture, while the RTX PRO 5000 uses GB202 with Blackwell 2.0. Transistor counts differ: 80,000 million for the H20 versus 92,200 million for the RTX PRO 5000. Die size is 814 mm² versus 750 mm², with density at 98.3M per mm² versus 122.9M per mm².

Clock speeds show the H20 at 1830 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost, while the RTX PRO 5000 runs at 1740 MHz base and 2377 MHz boost. Memory configurations are starkly different: 96 GB HBM3 at 5.3 Gbps effective over 6144 bit, versus 72 GB GDDR7 at 28 Gbps effective over 384 bit. Bandwidth is 4.03 TB/s versus 1.34 TB/s.

Compute resources: shading units 9,984 versus 14,080, TMUs 312 versus 440, ROPs 24 versus 160, tensor cores 312 versus 440. The RTX PRO 5000 additionally has 110 RT cores, while the H20's RT core count is not recorded. Pixel rate is 47.52 GPixel/s versus 380.3 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 617.8 GTexel/s versus 1,045.9 GTexel/s. FP32 is 39.54 TFLOPS versus 66.94 TFLOPS. FP16 is 79.07 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 66.94 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and form factor: TDP 500 W versus 300 W, suggested PSU 900 W versus 700 W, slot width SXM Module versus Dual-slot, power connector none versus 1x 16-pin. Display outputs: none versus 4x DisplayPort 2.1b. API support: the H20 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, while the RTX PRO 5000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Card dimensions for the RTX PRO 5000 are 267 mm length, 111 mm height, and 40 mm width. The H20 has no recorded dimensions. Release dates differ: the H20 launched in January 2024, the RTX PRO 5000 in October 2025.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX PRO 5000 wins decisively in graphics and rasterization workloads. Its FP32 compute of 66.94 TFLOPS outperforms the H20's 39.54 TFLOPS by 69%. Pixel rate is 8x higher, texture rate is 69% higher, and it has 41% more shading units plus 6.7x more ROPs. These advantages translate directly to faster rendering, higher frame rates in viewport applications, and smoother real-time visualization. The presence of 110 RT cores and full DirectX 12 Ultimate support makes it the clear choice for ray tracing and modern game engine development. Its 300 W TDP and dual-slot design allow deployment in standard workstations, and the 4x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs enable multi-monitor setups without additional hardware.

The H20 wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 96 GB HBM3 pool exceeds the RTX PRO 5000's 72 GB by 33%, and its 4.03 TB/s bandwidth is 67% higher than the Blackwell card's 1.34 TB/s. For workloads that hold large datasets in memory, such as large language model inference, scientific simulations, or data analytics, the H20's architecture avoids the bottleneck of moving data between GPU and host memory. Its FP16 throughput of 79.07 TFLOPS also surpasses the RTX PRO 5000's 66.94 TFLOPS by 18%, giving it an edge in mixed-precision training and inference tasks. The SXM module form factor and 500 W TDP are designed for server chassis with dedicated cooling, not desktop enclosures.

The RTX PRO 5000's benchmark results show a card that performs well in compute tests, with a Passmark GPU compute score of 15,667, but its low DirectX 12 score of 78 and DirectX 9 score of 311 suggest driver or architectural optimization toward newer APIs. The H20's lack of recorded benchmarks means the database cannot confirm its real-world performance, but its specification sheet points to a specialized server role. For users requiring display output, high fill rates, and modern graphics API support, the RTX PRO 5000 is the only option. For users requiring maximum memory bandwidth and capacity in a rack-mounted environment, the H20 is the only option. The two cards do not compete for the same tasks; they serve adjacent but distinct segments of the GPU market.