NVIDIA N1 16SM vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no shared benchmark results between the NVIDIA N1 16SM and the NVIDIA RTX A400, so a direct score comparison is not possible from recorded measurements. What is available are the RTX A400’s own benchmark scores and its position relative to other GPUs. The RTX A400 records a Geekbench OpenCL score of 22844 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 22237. In Passmark tests, it scores 5983 in G3D, 2557 in GPU compute, 899 in G2D, and 87 in DirectX 9, 37 in DirectX 11, 32 in DirectX 10, and 27 in DirectX 12.

The N1 16SM has no benchmark entries in the database, meaning its average benchmark score is listed as 0 and its percentile versus all GPUs is 50. The RTX A400, by contrast, holds a percentile of 35 and an average benchmark score of 6078. Since the N1 16SM lacks any recorded scores, the head-to-head comparison must rely on architectural specifications rather than measured performance data.

The RTX A400’s nearest rivals show how it sits in the market. It is effectively tied with the NVIDIA GeForce MX230, which has an average score of 6077 and a delta of 0 percent. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 6049, placing the A400 0.5 percent ahead. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 6117, meaning the A400 trails it by 0.6 percent. The AMD Radeon 760M scores 6019, with the A400 leading it by 1 percent. These narrow deltas indicate the A400 occupies a tightly contested performance band among entry-level and older workstation parts.

For the N1 16SM, the absence of benchmark data means no wins can be credited to it in this section. The RTX A400 has nine recorded benchmark scores across OpenCL, Vulkan, and multiple Passmark tests, all of which are absent for the N1 16SM. The data shows that any performance claim for the N1 16SM must be inferred from its hardware configuration, not from measured results.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architecture generations and manufacturing processes. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip built on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, specifically from the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The RTX A400 uses the GA107 chip on Ampere architecture, from the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation, and is fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung.

Die size and transistor counts differ substantially. The N1 16SM has a die size of 382 mm², while the RTX A400 has a die size of 200 mm². The RTX A400’s transistor count is recorded as 8,700 million, with a transistor density of 43.5 million per mm². The N1 16SM’s transistor count is listed as unknown, and its density is not provided.

Clock behavior also separates the two. The N1 16SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The RTX A400 runs at a base clock of 1417 MHz and a boost clock of 1762 MHz. Memory clocks differ as well: the N1 16SM uses a memory clock of 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, while the RTX A400 runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective.

The N1 16SM is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a slot width of IGP, no power connectors, and no thermal design power listed. The RTX A400 is a single-slot discrete card with a 50 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested power supply of 250 W. The bus interface differs: the N1 16SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RTX A400 uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

Display outputs are not equal. The N1 16SM provides a single HDMI output. The RTX A400 provides four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. API support is also different: the N1 16SM lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all as N/A, while the RTX A400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

Given the lack of benchmark data for the N1 16SM, its advantages must be assessed from its specifications. The N1 16SM has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, 24 render output units, 16 ray tracing cores, and 64 tensor cores. The RTX A400 has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, 16 ROPs, 6 RT cores, and 24 tensor cores. The N1 16SM leads in raw compute resources, with FP32 throughput of 9.609 TFLOPS versus the RTX A400’s 2.706 TFLOPS. Pixel rate is 56.30 GPixel/s for the N1 16SM versus 28.19 GPixel/s for the RTX A400. Texture rate is 300.3 GTexel/s versus 42.29 GTexel/s.

Memory capacity heavily favors the N1 16SM. It has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s. For large datasets or multi-application workloads, the N1 16SM’s memory pool is a decisive advantage.

The RTX A400 wins in software compatibility and physical deployment. Its API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 means it can run modern graphics workloads directly. The N1 16SM lists all APIs as N/A, which limits its applicability to environments that do not require those APIs. The RTX A400 also provides four display outputs versus one, making it suitable for multi-monitor workstation setups. Its compact 163 mm length and 69 mm height fit in space-constrained systems, and its 50 W TDP with no external power connectors allows installation in low-power configurations.

The RTX A400 also has a production status of Active, as does the N1 16SM, but the A400 has a recorded release date of 2024-04-15, while the N1 16SM is dated 2026-05-31. The A400 has a predecessor (Quadro Turing) and a successor (Workstation Ada), while the N1 16SM has neither listed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM has 2048 shading units, while the NVIDIA RTX A400 has 768 shading units.

Q: What is the memory capacity of each card?

A: The N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the RTX A400 support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Yes, the RTX A400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 16SM lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A.

Q: What are the physical dimensions of the RTX A400?

A: The RTX A400 has a length of 163 mm (6.4 inches) and a height of 69 mm (2.7 inches). It is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a 50 W TDP.

Q: What is the process node for each GPU?

A: The N1 16SM is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The RTX A400 is fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung.

Q: How many display outputs does each GPU provide?

A: The N1 16SM provides one HDMI output. The RTX A400 provides four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA N1 16SM | NVIDIA RTX A400 |

|----------------|----------------|------------------|

| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 | Ampere |

| Generation | Blackwell IGP (N1x) | Workstation Ampere (Ax000) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Die Size | 382 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistors | Unknown | 8,700 million |

| Transistor Density | Not listed | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 741 MHz | 1417 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2346 MHz | 1762 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1067 MHz 8.5 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz 12 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 128 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5X | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 273.2 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 768 |

| TMUs | 128 | 24 |

| ROPs | 24 | 16 |

| RT Cores | 16 | 6 |

| Tensor Cores | 64 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 56.30 GPixel/s | 28.19 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 300.3 GTexel/s | 42.29 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 9.609 TFLOPS | 2.706 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 9.609 TFLOPS (1:1) | 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | Unknown | 50 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2026-05-31 | 2024-04-15 |

| Production Status | Active | Active |

The Verdict

The recorded data shows two very different products. The NVIDIA N1 16SM is an integrated GPU with a massive 128 GB memory pool, a 256-bit bus, and significantly higher compute resources: 2048 shading units, 9.609 TFLOPS FP32, and 300.3 GTexel/s texture rate. Its 5 nm process, PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, and 382 mm² die indicate a modern, high-capacity design aimed at workloads that need large memory and raw throughput. However, it has no recorded benchmarks, no API support listed, and only one display output.

The NVIDIA RTX A400 is a compact, single-slot discrete card with a 50 W TDP, four mini-DisplayPort outputs, and full API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its benchmark scores are recorded: 22844 in Geekbench OpenCL, 22237 in Geekbench Vulkan, and 5983 in Passmark G3D. Its nearest rivals show it performs within 1 percent of the AMD Radeon 760M and within 0.5 percent of the NVIDIA Quadro P2000, placing it in the entry-level workstation segment.

For users who need a drop-in discrete card with proven driver and API support, the RTX A400 is the data-backed choice. It has measured scores, a defined TDP, a compact physical footprint, and multi-monitor capability. For applications that can use the N1 16SM’s 128 GB memory and higher compute throughput, and that do not rely on the APIs the A400 supports, the N1 16SM is the specification leader. The absence of benchmark data for the N1 16SM means its real-world performance cannot be verified from the database, so any decision favoring it must rest on its architectural advantages alone.