NVIDIA H20 vs NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the NVIDIA H20 or the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs, with no head-to-head benchmark results, no win counts, and no nearest rivals listed. Consequently, direct performance comparisons must be derived entirely from the specification data recorded in the database.

The most substantial performance differential appears in raw compute throughput. The H20 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Switch 2 GPU delivers 4.301 TFLOPS. This places the H20 approximately 9.2 times higher in single-precision floating-point work, a gap that reflects the fundamental difference in their design targets. In FP16 compute, the H20 reaches 79.07 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), compared to 8.602 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) for the Switch 2 GPU, again a roughly 9.2-fold advantage.

Memory bandwidth widens the gap further. The H20 uses 96 GB of HBM3 memory across a 6144-bit bus, achieving 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth. The Switch 2 GPU uses 12 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s. The H20's bandwidth is approximately 39.4 times higher, a disparity that heavily influences workloads dependent on large data movement, such as training large models or processing high-resolution datasets.

Pixel and texture throughput also show clear separation. The H20 reaches 47.52 GPixel/s and 617.8 GTexel/s, whereas the Switch 2 GPU achieves 22.40 GPixel/s and 67.20 GTexel/s. The H20 leads pixel fill by about 2.1 times and texture fill by about 9.2 times, consistent with its much larger shading unit count of 9984 versus 1536.

Clock speeds present an interesting inversion. The H20 operates at a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 1980 MHz. The Switch 2 GPU has a base clock of 561 MHz and a boost clock of 1400 MHz. While the H20's boost clock is higher, the Switch 2 GPU's boost clock is 1400 MHz, which is not far below the H20's base clock, yet the massive difference in core counts and memory subsystem makes clock speed comparisons secondary in overall performance.

The H20's texture rate advantage comes from 312 TMUs versus 48 TMUs, and its pixel rate advantage comes from 24 ROPs versus 16 ROPs, although the ROP gap is smaller than the TMU gap. The H20 also has 312 tensor cores, while the Switch 2 GPU has 48 tensor cores, indicating a 6.5-fold difference in tensor throughput potential, though the database does not list tensor TFLOPS figures.

The Verdict

The data shows two products built for entirely separate contexts. The NVIDIA H20 is a server-oriented accelerator in the Hopper architecture, designed for high-throughput computing environments. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU is a console-oriented processor in the Ampere architecture, designed for constrained power envelopes and integrated system use.

For workloads demanding maximum FP32 or FP16 throughput, massive memory bandwidth, and large memory capacity, the H20 is the clear choice based on the recorded specifications. Its 96 GB memory capacity and 4.03 TB/s bandwidth dwarf the Switch 2 GPU's 12 GB and 102.4 GB/s. Any task involving large model weights, high-resolution tensors, or substantial batch processing would favor the H20.

For a console environment, the Switch 2 GPU offers a far lower thermal and power profile. The H20 has a TDP of 500 W and requires a suggested PSU of 900 W, while the Switch 2 GPU has a TDP of 40 W. The Switch 2 GPU also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the H20 lists N/A for all three APIs, indicating no consumer graphics API support. The H20 has no display outputs, and the Switch 2 GPU also has no display outputs, so neither is suited for direct display connection.

The Switch 2 GPU has a launch MSRP of 449 USD, while the H20 has no launch MSRP recorded in the database. The H20 is an SXM Module with PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the Switch 2 GPU has no bus interface listed and comes as a physical package measuring 272 mm in length, 116 mm in height, and 14 mm in width. These form factors reinforce that the H20 is a datacenter component, while the Switch 2 GPU is a console chip.

Users who need server-grade compute with no graphics API requirements should select the H20. Users who need a low-power, compact GPU with modern graphics API support should select the Switch 2 GPU. The database does not provide any cross-product benchmark scores, so no direct performance percentage can be cited beyond the specification-derived ratios above.

Architecture Differences

The H20 is built on the GH100 chip using the Hopper architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It contains 80,000 million transistors on a die size of 814 mm², yielding a transistor density of 98.3 million per mm². The Switch 2 GPU uses the GA10B chip with the Ampere architecture, manufactured on an 8 nm process at Samsung. Its transistor count is listed as unknown, and its die size is 200 mm² with no transistor density recorded.

The H20's memory system uses HBM3 with a 6144-bit bus width, achieving 4.03 TB/s bandwidth. The Switch 2 GPU uses LPDDR5X with a 128-bit bus, achieving 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The H20 has 9984 shading units, 312 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with 312 tensor cores and no RT core count listed. The Switch 2 GPU has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with 48 tensor cores and 12 RT cores.

The H20 supports no graphics APIs, listing N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The Switch 2 GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This reflects the H20's focus on compute acceleration rather than graphics rendering, while the Switch 2 GPU carries full consumer graphics API support.

The H20 has no display outputs, and the Switch 2 GPU also has no display outputs. Both are active production parts, but their release dates differ: the H20 was released on 2024-01-31, and the Switch 2 GPU was released on 2025-06-04. The H20's predecessor is listed as Server Ada and its successor as Server Blackwell, while the Switch 2 GPU has no predecessor or successor listed.

The H20 uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the Switch 2 GPU uses an 8 nm process at Samsung. The H20's larger die area (814 mm² versus 200 mm²) and higher transistor count (80,000 million versus unknown) indicate a much more complex chip, though the Switch 2 GPU's smaller die and lower power target suggest a design optimized for cost and thermals.

Specification Differences

Several specification fields differ between the two GPUs. The process node is 5 nm for the H20 and 8 nm for the Switch 2 GPU. The foundry is TSMC for the H20 and Samsung for the Switch 2 GPU. The H20 has 80,000 million transistors, while the Switch 2 GPU's transistor count is unknown. Die size is 814 mm² for the H20 and 200 mm² for the Switch 2 GPU. Transistor density is 98.3M per mm² for the H20 and null for the Switch 2 GPU.

Base clocks differ: 1830 MHz for the H20 versus 561 MHz for the Switch 2 GPU. Boost clocks differ: 1980 MHz for the H20 versus 1400 MHz for the Switch 2 GPU. Memory clocks also differ: 1313 MHz (5.3 Gbps effective) for the H20 versus 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective) for the Switch 2 GPU.

Memory size is 96 GB for the H20 versus 12 GB for the Switch 2 GPU. Memory type is HBM3 for the H20 versus LPDDR5X for the Switch 2 GPU. Bus width is 6144 bit for the H20 versus 128 bit for the Switch 2 GPU. Bandwidth is 4.03 TB/s for the H20 versus 102.4 GB/s for the Switch 2 GPU.

Shading units are 9984 for the H20 versus 1536 for the Switch 2 GPU. TMUs are 312 versus 48. ROPs are 24 versus 16. RT cores are null for the H20 versus 12 for the Switch 2 GPU. Tensor cores are 312 versus 48.

Pixel rate is 47.52 GPixel/s for the H20 versus 22.40 GPixel/s for the Switch 2 GPU. Texture rate is 617.8 GTexel/s for the H20 versus 67.20 GTexel/s for the Switch 2 GPU. FP32 compute is 39.54 TFLOPS versus 4.301 TFLOPS. FP16 compute is 79.07 TFLOPS versus 8.602 TFLOPS.

TDP is 500 W for the H20 versus 40 W for the Switch 2 GPU. The H20 is an SXM Module with a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the Switch 2 GPU has no bus interface listed. The H20 has no power connectors listed and a suggested PSU of 900 W, while the Switch 2 GPU has no power connectors or suggested PSU listed.

Display outputs are "No outputs" for both. API support differs: the H20 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, while the Switch 2 GPU lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Dimensions differ: the H20 has no length, height, or width recorded, while the Switch 2 GPU measures 272 mm in length, 116 mm in height, and 14 mm in width. Release dates differ: 2024-01-31 for the H20 versus 2025-06-04 for the Switch 2 GPU. The H20 has a predecessor (Server Ada) and successor (Server Blackwell), while the Switch 2 GPU has neither. The H20 has no launch MSRP, while the Switch 2 GPU has a launch MSRP of 449 USD.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA H20 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, compared to 4.301 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU, making the H20 approximately 9.2 times higher.

Q: What are the memory capacities and bandwidths of the two GPUs?

A: The H20 has 96 GB of HBM3 memory with a 6144-bit bus and 4.03 TB/s bandwidth. The Switch 2 GPU has 12 GB of LPDDR5X memory with a 128-bit bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan?

A: No. The H20 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The Switch 2 GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the power consumption figures?

A: The H20 has a TDP of 500 W and a suggested PSU of 900 W. The Switch 2 GPU has a TDP of 40 W, with no suggested PSU recorded.

Q: When were the two GPUs released?

A: The H20 was released on 2024-01-31. The Switch 2 GPU was released on 2025-06-04.

Q: Which GPU has more tensor cores and RT cores?

A: The H20 has 312 tensor cores and no RT core count listed. The Switch 2 GPU has 48 tensor cores and 12 RT cores.