NVIDIA Jetson T5000 vs NVIDIA N1X 48SM Comparison

NVIDIA lists two integrated-class parts in its server and IGP lineup: the Jetson T5000, built on the GB10B chip under the Blackwell architecture, and the N1X 48SM, built on the GB20B chip under the Blackwell 2.0 architecture. Both are active production parts from TSMC’s 5 nm process, and both use 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The similarities end there. The T5000 is a compact IGP with modest compute resources, while the N1X 48SM doubles or triples nearly every execution unit count and boosts clock speeds substantially. Because neither part has recorded benchmark scores in the database, the comparison below relies on the architectural specifications, clock behavior, and memory configuration recorded for each.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The N1X 48SM boosts to 2346 MHz, while the Jetson T5000 boosts to 1575 MHz. The base clocks also differ, with the N1X 48SM running at 741 MHz and the T5000 at 1386 MHz.

Q: How do the FP32 performance figures compare?

A: The N1X 48SM delivers 28.83 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Jetson T5000 delivers 8.064 TFLOPS. That puts the N1X 48SM at roughly 3.57 times the FP32 throughput of the T5000.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same memory type and capacity?

A: Yes. Both use 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, and both achieve 273.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The memory clock is also identical at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective.

Q: What is the difference in shading unit count?

A: The N1X 48SM has 6144 shading units, while the Jetson T5000 has 2560. The N1X 48SM also has 384 texture mapping units and 48 ROPs, compared to 80 TMUs and 32 ROPs on the T5000.

Q: Are there any display outputs on either GPU?

A: The Jetson T5000 has no display outputs. The N1X 48SM includes one HDMI output.

Q: What are the power connector requirements?

A: Both GPUs use no external power connectors. The Jetson T5000 has a suggested PSU rating of 300 W, while the N1X 48SM has no suggested PSU value recorded.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architecture revisions. The Jetson T5000 uses the GB10B chip and is classified under the Blackwell architecture, specifically the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation. The N1X 48SM uses the GB20B chip and carries the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, placed in the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. Both are built on TSMC’s 5 nm process, and both have unknown transistor counts, but the die sizes differ slightly: the T5000 measures 391 mm², while the N1X 48SM measures 382 mm².

The execution unit breakdown shows a clear scaling step. The T5000 has 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 20 RT cores, and 96 tensor cores. The N1X 48SM has 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores. The N1X 48SM has 2.4 times the shading units, 4.8 times the TMUs, 1.5 times the ROPs, 2.4 times the RT cores, and 2 times the tensor cores relative to the T5000.

Clock behavior also diverges. The T5000 runs at a base clock of 1386 MHz and a boost clock of 1575 MHz, which is a modest 189 MHz increase. The N1X 48SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz, a 1605 MHz increase. The N1X 48SM’s boost clock is 48.9% higher than the T5000’s boost clock, even though its base clock is 46.5% lower. This suggests the N1X 48SM is designed for aggressive boost behavior under load, whereas the T5000 maintains a higher idle or baseline frequency.

Both parts use the same memory subsystem: 128 GB of LPDDR5X, 256-bit bus, 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, and 1067 MHz memory clock with 8.5 Gbps effective. The bus interface differs, with the T5000 using PCIe 5.0 x8 and the N1X 48SM using PCIe 5.0 x16. The T5000 has no display outputs, while the N1X 48SM has one HDMI output.

The TDP figures are incomplete. The T5000 has a recorded TDP of 120 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W. The N1X 48SM has no TDP value and no suggested PSU in the database. Both are IGP slot-width parts with no power connectors.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either GPU. The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, and both parts show zero wins in the winsA and winsB fields. The average benchmark score for both is 0, and the percentile versus all GPUs is 50 for each. Without measured performance data, the comparison must be made from the specification sheet.

The most direct comparison is FP32 throughput. The N1X 48SM delivers 28.83 TFLOPS, which is 20.766 TFLOPS higher than the T5000’s 8.064 TFLOPS. In percentage terms, the N1X 48SM delivers 257.6% more FP32 performance. FP16 performance matches the FP32 ratio on both parts, with the N1X 48SM at 28.83 TFLOPS (1:1) and the T5000 at 8.064 TFLOPS (1:1).

Texture rate follows the TMU count and clock. The N1X 48SM has a texture rate of 900.9 GTexel/s, while the T5000 has 126.0 GTexel/s. That is a 614.9 GTexel/s difference, or roughly 7.15 times higher on the N1X 48SM. Pixel rate is also higher on the N1X 48SM: 112.6 GPixel/s versus 50.40 GPixel/s on the T5000, a 62.2 GPixel/s gap.

The memory bandwidth is identical at 273.2 GB/s for both, which means the N1X 48SM’s higher compute throughput is not matched by a proportional increase in memory bandwidth. The T5000’s memory bandwidth per FP32 TFLOPS is 33.9 GB/s per TFLOPS, while the N1X 48SM’s is 9.5 GB/s per TFLOPS. This indicates the N1X 48SM is more compute-heavy relative to its memory subsystem, which could limit performance in bandwidth-bound workloads.

The N1X 48SM has 48 RT cores versus 20 on the T5000, and 192 tensor cores versus 96. The RT core count is 2.4 times higher, and the tensor core count is 2 times higher. These ratios do not translate directly to performance without benchmark data, but they establish the N1X 48SM as the more capable part for ray tracing and tensor operations.

The T5000’s boost clock of 1575 MHz is lower than the N1X 48SM’s 2346 MHz, but the T5000’s base clock of 1386 MHz is higher than the N1X 48SM’s 741 MHz. The T5000 also has a smaller die at 391 mm² versus 382 mm², which is a 9 mm² difference.

The Verdict

The data points to the N1X 48SM as the higher-performance part in nearly every compute metric. It has more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, more RT cores, more tensor cores, a higher boost clock, higher FP32 throughput, higher texture rate, and higher pixel rate. The only hardware metric where the T5000 leads is base clock, and the only equal metrics are memory capacity, memory type, bus width, memory bandwidth, memory clock, process node, and foundry.

The T5000 is a 120 W part with a suggested 300 W PSU, while the N1X 48SM has no TDP or PSU guidance recorded. The T5000 has no display outputs; the N1X 48SM has one HDMI output. The T5000 uses a PCIe 5.0 x8 interface, while the N1X 48SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

The N1X 48SM’s FP32 performance is 3.57 times the T5000’s, and its texture rate is 7.15 times higher. Its pixel rate is 2.23 times higher. These ratios are substantial, but the lack of benchmark scores means real-world application performance cannot be confirmed. The database records zero wins for either part, and the average benchmark score for both is 0.

For users choosing between the two, the N1X 48SM is the clear choice if compute throughput, texture work, or pixel fill rate is the priority. The T5000 is the only one with a recorded TDP and PSU suggestion, which may matter for system integration. The T5000 also has a higher base clock, which could benefit workloads that run at sustained low utilization rather than bursty boost states.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two parts:

• Chip: GB10B versus GB20B
• Architecture: Blackwell versus Blackwell 2.0
• Generation: Server Blackwell (Bxx) versus Blackwell IGP (N1x)
• Die size: 391 mm² versus 382 mm²
• Base clock: 1386 MHz versus 741 MHz
• Boost clock: 1575 MHz versus 2346 MHz
• Shading units: 2560 versus 6144
• TMUs: 80 versus 384
• ROPs: 32 versus 48
• RT cores: 20 versus 48
• Tensor cores: 96 versus 192
• Pixel rate: 50.40 GPixel/s versus 112.6 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 126.0 GTexel/s versus 900.9 GTexel/s
• FP32: 8.064 TFLOPS versus 28.83 TFLOPS
• FP16: 8.064 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 28.83 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 120 W versus unknown
• Suggested PSU: 300 W versus null
• Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x8 versus PCIe 5.0 x16
• Display outputs: No outputs versus 1x HDMI
• Dimensions: 87 mm length, 100 mm height, 15 mm width versus null values
• Release date: 2025-08-26 versus 2026-05-31
• Launch MSRP: 2,999 USD versus null
• Predecessor: Server Hopper versus null
• Successor: Server Rubin versus null

Fields that are identical include process node (5 nm), foundry (TSMC), transistors (unknown for both), memory size (128 GB), memory type (LPDDR5X), bus width (256 bit), bandwidth (273.2 GB/s), memory clock (1067 MHz, 8.5 Gbps effective), slot width (IGP), power connectors (None), APIs (DirectX N/A, OpenGL N/A, Vulkan N/A), production status (Active), and percentile versus all GPUs (50 for both).

Where Each One Wins

The N1X 48SM wins on all compute throughput metrics. Its FP32 and FP16 outputs are 28.83 TFLOPS each, compared to 8.064 TFLOPS on the T5000. It also leads in texture rate at 900.9 GTexel/s versus 126.0 GTexel/s, and pixel rate at 112.6 GPixel/s versus 50.40 GPixel/s. The N1X 48SM has more of every execution unit type: 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores. Its boost clock of 2346 MHz is higher, and it has a wider PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. The N1X 48SM also has a display output, which the T5000 lacks.

The T5000 wins on base clock, at 1386 MHz versus 741 MHz. It has a recorded TDP of 120 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W, which provides a power envelope for system design. The T5000 also has a release date in 2025, while the N1X 48SM is dated 2026. The T5000 has a launch MSRP of 2,999 USD, while the N1X 48SM has no MSRP recorded. The T5000’s dimensions are recorded (87 mm length, 100 mm height, 15 mm width), while the N1X 48SM’s dimensions are null.

Memory-bound workloads will see identical bandwidth on both parts: 273.2 GB/s. The T5000’s lower compute throughput relative to that bandwidth means it has more bandwidth available per FLOP, which could favor memory-heavy tasks. The N1X 48SM’s higher compute counts suggest it is better suited for compute-dense workloads such as tensor operations or ray tracing, given its RT core count of 48 and tensor core count of 192.

The T5000’s 20 RT cores and 96 tensor cores are still substantial, but they are half the tensor core count and less than half the RT core count of the N1X 48SM. The N1X 48SM’s higher texture rate also indicates better performance for texturing tasks, assuming the memory bandwidth does not become the limiting factor.

The T5000’s higher base clock could provide more predictable performance in steady-state workloads that do not trigger boost behavior. The N1X 48SM’s lower base clock and higher boost clock suggest it relies on thermal and power headroom to reach its peak performance, which may be less consistent in constrained environments.

The N1X 48SM has no TDP data, so its power requirements are unknown. The T5000’s 120 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU give a clear power budget. The N1X 48SM also has no suggested PSU, which leaves its system integration requirements unspecified.

The release dates place the T5000 first, with the N1X 48SM arriving later. The T5000 lists a predecessor (Server Hopper) and successor (Server Rubin), while the N1X 48SM has neither. The T5000’s launch MSRP of 2,999 USD is the only pricing data available; the N1X 48SM has no launch MSRP.

For a use case requiring display output, the N1X 48SM is the only option with an HDMI port. For a use case requiring a known power envelope, the T5000 is the only option with TDP and PSU data. For raw compute, the N1X 48SM is dominant across every measured throughput metric.