NVIDIA N1 20SM vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the NVIDIA N1 20SM?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, using the GB20B chip manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It belongs to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation and was released on May 31, 2026.

Q: What is the NVIDIA RTX A400?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A400 is a discrete workstation graphics card based on the Ampere architecture, using the GA107 chip manufactured on an 8 nm process by Samsung. It belongs to the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation and was released on April 15, 2024.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in memory capacity?

A: The N1 20SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The N1 20SM offers 32 times the memory capacity and nearly three times the bandwidth.

Q: What is the performance percentile of each GPU in the database?

A: The N1 20SM sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, while the RTX A400 sits at the 35th percentile. The N1 20SM's average benchmark score is not recorded in the database, whereas the RTX A400 has an average benchmark score of 6078.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The RTX A400 has a base clock of 1417 MHz and a boost clock of 1762 MHz. The N1 20SM has a lower base clock of 741 MHz but a higher boost clock of 2346 MHz.

Q: What are the API support differences?

A: The RTX A400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 20SM lists no API support in the database, with DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all marked as N/A.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA N1 20SM and NVIDIA RTX A400 represent two distinct architectural generations from NVIDIA. The N1 20SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB20B chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The RTX A400 uses the older Ampere architecture with the GA107 chip, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. This process difference is significant: the N1 20SM's die measures 382 mm², while the RTX A400's die measures 200 mm².

Despite its larger die, the N1 20SM's transistor count is unknown, whereas the RTX A400 contains 8,700 million transistors with a density of 43.5M per mm². The N1 20SM's larger die size combined with the more advanced 5 nm process suggests a substantially higher transistor budget, though exact figures are not recorded.

The compute resources differ markedly. The N1 20SM features 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output pipelines. The RTX A400 has 768 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines. For ray tracing and tensor workloads, the N1 20SM includes 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores, while the RTX A400 includes 6 RT cores and 24 tensor cores.

Memory architecture also diverges. The N1 20SM uses LPDDR5X memory with a 256-bit bus width, totaling 128 GB and providing 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A400 uses GDDR6 memory with a 64-bit bus width, totaling 4 GB and providing 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The N1 20SM's memory clock is listed as 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, while the RTX A400 operates at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective.

The N1 20SM is an integrated graphics processor with no slot width and no power connectors, connected via PCIe 5.0 x16. The RTX A400 is a single-slot discrete card measuring 163 mm by 69 mm, also requiring no power connectors, with a suggested power supply of 250 W and a TDP of 50 W. The N1 20SM's TDP is unknown. Display outputs differ as well: the N1 20SM provides a single HDMI port, while the RTX A400 provides four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the N1 20SM and the RTX A400. The wins counter shows zero for both GPUs, and the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. However, the RTX A400 has recorded benchmark scores that place it in context against other GPUs.

The RTX A400's recorded benchmarks include Geekbench OpenCL at 22844, Geekbench Vulkan at 22237, Passmark DirectX 10 at 32, Passmark DirectX 11 at 37, Passmark DirectX 12 at 27, Passmark DirectX 9 at 87, Passmark G2D at 899, Passmark G3D at 5983, and Passmark GPU Compute at 2557. Its average benchmark score is 6078.

The RTX A400's nearest rivals in the database provide context for its performance tier. The NVIDIA GeForce MX230 has an average score of 6077, essentially identical to the RTX A400 with a delta of 0%. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 6049, 0.5% lower. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 6117, 0.6% higher. The AMD Radeon 760M scores 6019, 1% lower. These figures place the RTX A400 in a narrow performance band where the differences among rivals are within a single percentage point.

For the N1 20SM, no benchmark scores are recorded, and no nearest rivals are listed. Its percentile ranking of 50th versus the RTX A400's 35th suggests that, based on the database's overall distribution, the N1 20SM is expected to outperform the RTX A400 in general GPU tasks. The N1 20SM's raw compute specifications support this expectation: its FP32 throughput is 12.01 TFLOPS, compared to 2.706 TFLOPS for the RTX A400, a factor of approximately 4.4. Texture rate stands at 375.4 GTexel/s for the N1 20SM versus 42.29 GTexel/s for the RTX A400, and pixel rate is 56.30 GPixel/s versus 28.19 GPixel/s.

The FP16 figures mirror the FP32 values for both GPUs, with each listed as 1:1 ratio. The N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS FP16, while the RTX A400 delivers 2.706 TFLOPS FP16.

The Verdict

The recorded data indicates that the NVIDIA N1 20SM is positioned as a substantially more powerful processor in raw compute terms, with roughly 4.4 times the FP32 throughput of the RTX A400, more than 8 times the texture rate, and double the pixel rate. Its 50th percentile ranking versus the RTX A400's 35th percentile confirms that the database expects the N1 20SM to outperform the RTX A400 across the general GPU population.

The RTX A400, however, is a discrete workstation card with a defined 50 W TDP and established API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 20SM lists no API support, which may limit its applicability for certain software ecosystems that require these graphics APIs. The RTX A400 also offers four display outputs versus the N1 20SM's single HDMI port, making it more suitable for multi-display workstation configurations.

For compute-heavy workloads where raw shader throughput, texture processing, and memory bandwidth are primary factors, the N1 20SM's specifications suggest it is the stronger option. Its 128 GB memory pool dwarfs the RTX A400's 4 GB, and its bandwidth advantage of 273.2 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s further reinforces this position.

For users requiring established API compatibility, multiple display outputs, and a compact single-slot form factor with known power consumption, the RTX A400 is the documented choice. The N1 20SM's TDP is unknown, and its integrated nature means it relies on the host system's PCIe 5.0 x16 connection.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The process node differs: the N1 20SM uses 5 nm TSMC fabrication, while the RTX A400 uses 8 nm Samsung fabrication. Die size is 382 mm² for the N1 20SM versus 200 mm² for the RTX A400. Transistor count is unknown for the N1 20SM, while the RTX A400 has 8,700 million transistors with a density of 43.5M per mm².

Clock speeds differ: the N1 20SM has a 741 MHz base clock and 2346 MHz boost clock, while the RTX A400 has a 1417 MHz base clock and 1762 MHz boost clock. Memory clocks are 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) for the N1 20SM and 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for the RTX A400.

Memory configuration differs: 128 GB LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth for the N1 20SM, versus 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth for the RTX A400.

Compute units differ: the N1 20SM has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 20 RT cores, and 80 tensor cores. The RTX A400 has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, 16 ROPs, 6 RT cores, and 24 tensor cores.

Performance rates differ: the N1 20SM delivers 56.30 GPixel/s pixel rate, 375.4 GTexel/s texture rate, 12.01 TFLOPS FP32, and 12.01 TFLOPS FP16. The RTX A400 delivers 28.19 GPixel/s, 42.29 GTexel/s, 2.706 TFLOPS FP32, and 2.706 TFLOPS FP16.

Physical and power characteristics differ: the N1 20SM is an IGP with no slot width and no power connectors, while the RTX A400 is single-slot, 163 mm by 69 mm, with 50 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU. Bus interfaces differ: PCIe 5.0 x16 for the N1 20SM, PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RTX A400. Display outputs are 1x HDMI for the N1 20SM and 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a for the RTX A400. API support is N/A for the N1 20SM, while the RTX A400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Release dates differ: the N1 20SM launched on May 31, 2026, while the RTX A400 launched on April 15, 2024. Production status is Active for both. The RTX A400 lists its predecessor as Quadro Turing and successor as Workstation Ada, while the N1 20SM lists neither.

Where Each One Wins

The N1 20SM wins in raw computational throughput. Its FP32 performance of 12.01 TFLOPS is approximately 4.4 times the RTX A400's 2.706 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 375.4 GTexel/s is roughly 8.9 times the RTX A400's 42.29 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 56.30 GPixel/s is exactly double the RTX A400's 28.19 GPixel/s. These figures indicate dominance in shader-bound and texture-bound workloads.

The N1 20SM also wins decisively in memory capacity and bandwidth. With 128 GB of LPDDR5X versus 4 GB of GDDR6, and 273.2 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s, the N1 20SM can accommodate vastly larger datasets and move data between memory and compute units more rapidly. This advantage applies to large model inference, high-resolution texture sets, and data-intensive compute tasks.

The N1 20SM's RT core count of 20 versus 6, and tensor core count of 80 versus 24, indicate a structural advantage for ray tracing and tensor operations, though no specific benchmark scores are recorded to quantify these advantages in real workloads.

The RTX A400 wins in established software compatibility. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the N1 20SM lists no API support. For applications that require these graphics APIs, the RTX A400 is the only documented option between the two.

The RTX A400 wins in display flexibility. Its four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support multi-monitor workstation configurations, whereas the N1 20SM provides a single HDMI output. The RTX A400 also has known power characteristics with a 50 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU, while the N1 20SM's power consumption is undocumented.

The RTX A400 wins in physical footprint for discrete installation. Its single-slot design at 163 mm by 69 mm fits standard workstation chassis, while the N1 20SM is an integrated processor with no standalone dimensions recorded. The RTX A400's benchmark data also provides measurable performance expectations, with an average score of 6078 and specific results across Geekbench and Passmark tests, whereas the N1 20SM has no recorded benchmark scores to reference.