NVIDIA H200 NVL vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the NVIDIA H200 NVL compare to the NVIDIA N1X 40SM in raw compute performance?

A: The H200 NVL delivers 60.32 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 120.6 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1) performance. The N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (1:1). The H200 NVL leads in FP32 by roughly 2.5 times, while the N1X 40SM matches its FP32 and FP16 rates.

Q: What are the memory capacity and bandwidth differences?

A: The H200 NVL features 141 GB of HBM3e memory on a 6144-bit bus, providing 4.89 TB/s of bandwidth. The N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, with 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The H200 NVL offers nearly 18 times the memory bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The N1X 40SM has a boost clock of 2346 MHz, which is significantly higher than the H200 NVL’s boost clock of 1785 MHz. The N1X 40SM also has a lower base clock at 741 MHz versus 1365 MHz on the H200 NVL.

Q: How do the two compare in pixel and texture throughput?

A: The N1X 40SM achieves a pixel rate of 93.84 GPixel/s, which is higher than the H200 NVL’s 42.84 GPixel/s. However, the H200 NVL leads in texture rate with 942.5 GTexel/s, compared to the N1X 40SM’s 750.7 GTexel/s.

Q: What is the difference in shading unit count?

A: The H200 NVL has 16,896 shading units, while the N1X 40SM has 5,120. The H200 NVL also has 528 tensor cores and 528 TMUs, versus 160 tensor cores and 320 TMUs on the N1X 40SM. The N1X 40SM includes 40 RT cores; the H200 NVL does not list RT cores.

Q: Is there any benchmark score recorded for the N1X 40SM?

A: The database lists no benchmark scores for the N1X 40SM, with an average benchmark score of 0. The H200 NVL has a recorded Geekbench OpenCL score of 334,891, placing it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs.

Architecture Differences

The H200 NVL and N1X 40SM represent two distinct NVIDIA architectures. The H200 NVL is built on the GH100 chip using the Hopper architecture, which targets server workloads with a focus on massive parallel compute. The N1X 40SM uses the GB20B chip with the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, designated as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) for the N1x generation. Both are manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

The transistor counts differ substantially. The H200 NVL integrates 80,000 million transistors on a die size of 814 mm², yielding a transistor density of 98.3 million per square millimeter. The N1X 40SM has an unknown transistor count but a die size of 382 mm², less than half the H200’s die area. This size difference reflects their different roles: the H200 is a discrete, dual-slot server card, while the N1X is an IGP with a single HDMI output and no dedicated power connectors.

Cache and core configurations also diverge. The H200 NVL has 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 528 tensor cores. The N1X 40SM has 5,120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 160 tensor cores, and 40 RT cores. The H200 does not list RT cores, while the N1X includes them. The H200’s memory subsystem uses HBM3e with a 6144-bit bus, whereas the N1X uses LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus, a much narrower interface.

Clock behavior also differs. The H200 NVL has a base clock of 1365 MHz and a boost of 1785 MHz. The N1X 40SM has a lower base of 741 MHz but a higher boost of 2346 MHz. The N1X’s memory clock is 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective), while the H200 runs its memory at 1593 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective). The H200’s FP16 throughput is 120.6 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the N1X’s FP16 is 24.02 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, indicating the H200 dedicates more hardware to half-precision compute.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the H200 NVL and the N1X 40SM. The H200 NVL has one measured score: a Geekbench OpenCL result of 334,891, which places it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs. The N1X 40SM has no recorded benchmark scores, and its average benchmark score is listed as 0, placing it in the 50th percentile.

Without a direct match, the comparison must rely on the H200’s nearest rivals in the database. The H200 NVL scores 3.1% below the NVIDIA B200 (average score 345,482), 5.3% above the AMD Instinct MI300X (average score 317,994), 9.4% below the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC (average score 369,831), and 13.2% above the NVIDIA L40S (average score 295,763). These deltas show the H200 NVL sits in a competitive band among high-end accelerators, neither the fastest nor the slowest in its peer group.

The N1X 40SM, lacking any benchmark data, cannot be positioned against these rivals. Its FP32 and FP16 performance of 24.02 TFLOPS is far below the H200’s 60.32 TFLOPS FP32 and 120.6 TFLOPS FP16. The N1X’s memory bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s is also a fraction of the H200’s 4.89 TB/s. Even accounting for the N1X’s higher boost clock, the core count disparity (5,120 versus 16,896 shading units) means the H200 delivers more parallel throughput in compute-heavy scenarios.

The H200’s texture rate of 942.5 GTexel/s exceeds the N1X’s 750.7 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate of 42.84 GPixel/s is lower than the N1X’s 93.84 GPixel/s. These figures indicate the N1X has a more balanced rasterization setup relative to its compute capabilities, while the H200 prioritizes texture and compute throughput over pixel output. The N1X also has fewer TMUs (320 versus 528) and more ROPs (40 versus 24), which aligns with its higher pixel rate.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The H200 NVL uses the GH100 chip with Hopper architecture, while the N1X 40SM uses the GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0. The H200’s generation is Server Hopper (Hxx), and the N1X’s generation is Blackwell IGP (N1x). The H200 has a 5 nm process, 80,000 million transistors, and an 814 mm² die. The N1X also uses 5 nm but has an unknown transistor count and a 382 mm² die.

Clock speeds differ: the H200 runs at 1365 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost, while the N1X runs at 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost. Memory configurations are entirely different: the H200 has 141 GB of HBM3e on a 6144-bit bus with 4.89 TB/s bandwidth, whereas the N1X has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The H200’s memory clock is 1593 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective), and the N1X’s is 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective).

Core counts are markedly different: the H200 has 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 528 tensor cores. The N1X has 5,120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 160 tensor cores, and 40 RT cores. The H200 does not list RT cores, while the N1X includes them. The H200’s FP32 is 60.32 TFLOPS and FP16 is 120.6 TFLOPS (2:1), while the N1X’s FP32 and FP16 are both 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical specs also diverge. The H200 has a TDP of 600 W, uses 8-pin EPS connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The N1X has an unknown TDP, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The H200 is dual-slot with dimensions of 267 mm length and 111 mm height; the N1X is an IGP with no listed dimensions. The H200 has no display outputs, while the N1X has 1x HDMI. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16, and both have N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan APIs.

The release dates differ: the H200 was released on 2024-11-17, and the N1X is dated 2026-05-31. The H200’s predecessor is Server Ada and successor is Server Blackwell, while the N1X has no predecessor or successor listed. The H200’s production status is Active, and the N1X is also Active. Neither has a launch MSRP in the database.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two GPUs by role. The H200 NVL is a server-class accelerator with 141 GB of HBM3e, 4.89 TB/s of bandwidth, and 60.32 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. Its benchmark score of 334,891 in Geekbench OpenCL places it at the 100th percentile, and its nearest rivals include the B200, MI300X, B300 SXM6 AC, and L40S. This is a high-end compute part for workloads that demand massive memory bandwidth and parallel throughput.

The N1X 40SM is an IGP with 128 GB of LPDDR5X, 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth, and 24.02 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16. It has no recorded benchmarks, an average score of 0, and no nearest rivals. Its higher boost clock of 2346 MHz and pixel rate of 93.84 GPixel/s suggest a different focus, likely integrated graphics for systems where discrete cards are not used. The N1X’s 40 RT cores and single HDMI output further indicate a visual or display-oriented role rather than pure compute.

For compute-intensive server applications, the H200 NVL is the clear choice based on the recorded data. It delivers more than double the FP32 throughput, nearly 18 times the memory bandwidth, and a benchmark score that places it at the top of the database. The N1X 40SM, with no benchmark data and lower raw compute, cannot match this level of performance in the metrics recorded.

For systems requiring integrated graphics with a display output, the N1X 40SM is the only option of the two, as the H200 NVL has no display outputs. The N1X’s higher pixel rate and RT core support make it more suitable for rendering tasks, though its compute and memory figures are far below the H200. The choice depends entirely on workload: server compute points to the H200 NVL, while integrated graphics with HDMI output points to the N1X 40SM.