NVIDIA H200 NVL vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the NVIDIA H200 NVL compare to the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 in overall benchmark performance?

A: The H200 NVL is substantially faster. In the only shared benchmark test, Geekbench OpenCL, the H200 NVL scores 334,891 versus the Quadro RTX 6000's 74,179, a 351.5% advantage.

Q: Which GPU has the higher memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The H200 NVL has 141 GB of HBM3e memory with 4.89 TB/s bandwidth, while the Quadro RTX 6000 has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory with 672.0 GB/s bandwidth. The H200 also uses a 6144-bit bus compared to the Quadro's 384-bit bus.

Q: What are the production statuses of these two cards?

A: The H200 NVL is listed as "Active" and was released on November 17, 2024. The Quadro RTX 6000 is marked as "End-of-life" with a release date of August 12, 2018.

Q: How do their transistor counts and process nodes differ?

A: The H200 NVL uses a 5 nm process with 80,000 million transistors, while the Quadro RTX 6000 uses a 12 nm process with 18,600 million transistors. The H200's die size is 814 mm² versus the Quadro's 754 mm².

Q: Do the cards support the same APIs?

A: No. The Quadro RTX 6000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The H200 NVL lists all APIs as "N/A" and has no display outputs. The H200 NVL is a compute-focused accelerator.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two?

A: The H200 NVL has a TDP of 600 W with a suggested PSU of 1000 W, and uses an 8-pin EPS connector. The Quadro RTX 6000 has a TDP of 260 W with a suggested PSU of 600 W, using 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin connectors.

Where Each One Wins

The H200 NVL dominates in raw compute throughput. Its 60.32 TFLOPS FP32 versus the Quadro's 16.31 TFLOPS means a 3.7x advantage in single-precision work. In FP16, the H200 NVL delivers 120.6 TFLOPS (2:1) versus the Quadro's 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1), a similar gap. The H200 also has 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 528 tensor cores, compared to the Quadro's 4,608 shaders, 288 TMUs, and 576 tensor cores. For large-scale AI inference, scientific simulation, and massive dataset processing, the H200 NVL is the clear choice, as its 141 GB of HBM3e and 4.89 TB/s bandwidth can hold and feed enormous working sets that would never fit in the Quadro's 24 GB frame buffer.

The Quadro RTX 6000 wins in legacy graphics workloads. It has 96 ROPs versus the H200's 24, giving it a much higher pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s compared to 42.84 GPixel/s. It also has 72 RT cores, a feature the H200 NVL does not list at all. The Quadro supports display outputs (4x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C) while the H200 has none. For a workstation doing real-time rendering, ray tracing, or driving multiple monitors, the Quadro RTX 6000 is the practical choice. It also runs on PCIe 3.0 x16 rather than PCIe 5.0 x16, meaning it can be dropped into older systems. Its 260 W TDP requires only a 600 W PSU, versus the 1000 W recommendation for the H200 NVL.

The benchmark record confirms this split. In Geekbench OpenCL, a compute-oriented test, the H200 NVL scores 334,891 versus 74,179 for the Quadro, a 351.5% difference. The Quadro's additional Geekbench Vulkan score of 129,564 (not matched by the H200) indicates its graphics rendering capability remains relevant for client-side tasks. The data shows these are complementary products for different markets: the H200 NVL for compute and AI servers, the Quadro for professional visualization.

Architecture Differences

The H200 NVL is built on the Hopper architecture, specifically using the GH100 chip. The Quadro RTX 6000 uses the Turing architecture with the TU102 chip. These are two distinct generations: the H200 belongs to "Server Hopper (Hxx)" while the Quadro is in "Quadro Turing (Tx000)". This represents a generational leap of roughly six years in design philosophy.

The process node is a major differentiator. The H200 is fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process, while the Quadro uses TSMC's 12 nm node. This accounts for the dramatic difference in transistor density: 98.3 million transistors per mm² for the H200 versus 24.7 million per mm² for the Quadro. The H200 pack 80,000 million transistors onto an 814 mm² die, whereas the Quadro fits 18,600 million onto a 754 mm² die.

Memory architecture is another fundamental split. The H200 NVL uses HBM3e memory with a 6144-bit bus, achieving 4.89 TB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro RTX 6000 uses GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, reaching 672.0 GB/s. The H200's 141 GB capacity dwarfs the Quadro's 24 GB. The H200 also has no display outputs, while the Quadro provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C. The H200's API support is listed as N/A, while the Quadro supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The H200 NVL includes 528 tensor cores and no RT cores listed; the Quadro has 576 tensor cores and 72 RT cores. Both have tensor cores, but the H200's are newer generation. The H200's texture rate is 942.5 GTexel/s versus the Quadro's 509.8 GTexel/s, but the Quadro's pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/ss is far above the H200's 42.84 GPixel/s. The H200 NVL is a compute accelerator designed for server racks, which is why it uses a 8-pin EPS power connector and is 600 W TDP. The Quadro is a traditional workstation card with PCIe 3.0, dual-slot cooling, and display connectivity.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification category. The H200 NVL has 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The Quadro RTX 6000 has 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The H200 NVL has 528 tensor cores; the Quadro has 576. The H200 NVL lists no RT cores; the Quadro has 72.

Clock speeds are similar at the base level: the H200 runs at 1365 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost, while the Quadro runs at 1440 MHz base and 1770 MHz boost. Memory clocks differ significantly: the H200 runs at 1593 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective), the Quadro at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The H200 memory subsystem is wider (6144-bit) and much faster overall (4.89 TB/s vs 672.0 GB/s).

The H200 has an FP32 rate of 60.32 TFLOPS and FP16 rate of 120.6 TFLOPS. The Quadro has 16.31 FP32 and 32.62 FP16. Pixel rate is 42.84 GPixel/s versus 169.9 GPixel/s; texture rate is 942.5 GTexel/s versus 509.8 GTexel/s. The H200 has no display outputs, while the Quadro has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a plus 1x USB Type-C. The H200 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, the Quadro uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Power draw: the H200 has a 600 W TDP, the Quadro 260 W. The H200's suggested PSU is 1000 W, the Quadro's 600 W. The H200 uses an 8-pin EPS connector, the Quadro needs 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin. Physical dimensions are identical (267 mm length, 111 mm height, both dual-slot). Production status: the H200 is Active, the Quadro is End-of-life. The H200's release date is November 17, 2024, versus August 12, 2018 for the Quadro. The Quadro has a launch MSRP of 6,299 USD; the H200 has no MSRP listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The H200 NVL scores 334,891 points, while the Quadro RTX 6000 scores 74,179. This gives the H200 a 351.5% advantage, a massive generational leap. The H200 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 129,564, but the H200 lacks a Vulkan result, so there is no cross comparison there.

The H200 NVL's score places it in the 100th percentile against all GPUs, while the Quadro sits at the 94th percentile. The H200's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA B200, which scores 345,482 (3.1% faster), the AMD Instinct MI300X at 317,994 (5.3% slower), the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC at 369,831 (9.4% faster), and the NVIDIA L40S at 295,763 (13.2% slower). The H200 NVL is therefore in the top tier of server accelerators, just below the newest Blackwell parts but above the MI300X and L40S.

The Quadro RTX 6000's nearest rivals are closer: the AMD Radeon RX 7900M at 97,487 (4.5% below Quadro), the AMD Radeon Pro VII at 97,131 (4.9% below), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo at 106,750 (4.6% above), and the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X at 107,342 (5.1% above). The Quadro sits in the middle of that pack, a solid but not top-tier workstation GPU by today's standards.

What the numbers show is that the H200 NVL is not just a refresh, it is a completely different product class. Its OpenCL score is 351.5% higher than the Quadro's, and it holds a 100th percentile ranking versus 94th. The H200 NVL is a compute accelerator for AI and scientific workloads, while the Quadro RTX 6000 is a legacy workstation card with graphics focus. The recorded data supports this split: the H200 NVL wins the compute benchmark by a wide margin, but the Quadro has features the H200 lacks, including RT cores, display outputs, and a full graphics API stack. For any compute-heavy task, the H200 NVL is the clear choice; for interactive graphics, the Quadro remains the only option of the two, despite its age.