NVIDIA N1X 40SM vs NVIDIA RTX 6000D Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains no direct head-to-head test results between the NVIDIA N1X 40SM and the NVIDIA RTX 6000D. The N1X 40SM has no recorded benchmark scores, an average benchmark score of zero, and a percentile rank of 50 among all GPUs. The RTX 6000D, by contrast, has two recorded benchmark entries: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3522 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 388405. Its average benchmark score is 195964, placing it in the 98th percentile of all GPUs.

The absence of comparable measurements means the performance gap must be inferred from the architectural specifications and the RTX 6000D's position against its nearest rivals. The RTX 6000D's average score of 195964 sits within a narrow band of competition. It is 0.8% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB (average score 194415), 4.7% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB (average score 187147), and 6.1% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation (average score 184664). The only rival in the database that beats it is the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB, which scores 207124 and leads by 5.4%.

The N1X 40SM's lack of any benchmark data prevents a direct score comparison. The recorded data shows that the RTX 6000D is a high-performing workstation card, while the N1X 40SM is an integrated graphics processor with no measurable results in the database. Any quantitative comparison between the two must rely on the specification differences, which are substantial across nearly every measurable category.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same architecture, Blackwell 2.0, and both are manufactured by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The similarities end there. The N1X 40SM uses the GB20B chip and belongs to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation, while the RTX 6000D uses the GB202 chip and belongs to the Blackwell PRO W (x000) generation. The N1X 40SM is an integrated graphics processor with a slot width of IGP and no power connectors, whereas the RTX 6000D is a dual-slot discrete card with a single 16-pin power connector.

The chip-level differences are dramatic. The RTX 6000D contains 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 122.9 million per mm². The N1X 40SM's transistor count is listed as unknown, but its die size is 382 mm². The RTX 6000D's die is nearly double the area, which directly supports its far larger compute configuration.

The RTX 6000D ships with 19968 shading units, 624 texture mapping units, 192 raster operation units, 156 ray tracing cores, and 624 tensor cores. The N1X 40SM has 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores. The RTX 6000D carries roughly four times the shading units, nearly double the TMUs, and almost five times the ROPs.

Clock speeds also diverge. The N1X 40SM runs at a 741 MHz base clock and a 2346 MHz boost clock. The RTX 6000D runs at a 1992 MHz base clock and a 2430 MHz boost clock. The RTX 6000D's base clock is 2.7 times higher, while its boost clock is only 3.6% higher, indicating that the N1X 40SM relies heavily on boost behavior to reach respectable performance.

Memory architecture is another major split. The N1X 40SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 6000D uses 84 GB of GDDR7 on a 448-bit bus, delivering 1.40 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 6000D has over five times the memory bandwidth despite having less total memory capacity.

The API support also differs completely. The N1X 40SM lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A, meaning it offers no traditional graphics API support. The RTX 6000D supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1X 40SM has a single HDMI display output, while the RTX 6000D provides four DisplayPort 2.1b outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The RTX 6000D delivers 97.04 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 performance, compared to 24.02 TFLOPS for the N1X 40SM in both precision formats. The RTX 6000D is 4.04 times faster in FP32 and FP16.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 6000D has 84 GB of GDDR7 on a 448-bit bus with 1.40 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 6000D has more bandwidth, while the N1X 40SM has more capacity.

Q: What are the pixel and texture throughput differences?

A: The RTX 6000D achieves 466.6 GPixel/s and 1,516.3 GTexel/s. The N1X 40SM achieves 93.84 GPixel/s and 750.7 GTexel/s. The RTX 6000D is 4.97 times faster in pixel fill and 2.02 times faster in texture fill.

Q: Does the N1X 40SM support standard graphics APIs?

A: No. The N1X 40SM lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A. The RTX 6000D supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the power requirement for the RTX 6000D?

A: The RTX 6000D has a TDP of 600 W and requires a 1000 W suggested power supply. It uses a single 16-pin power connector. The N1X 40SM has no power connectors and an unknown TDP.

Q: How does the RTX 6000D rank against other GPUs?

A: The RTX 6000D sits in the 98th percentile of all GPUs. It is 0.8% ahead of the Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB, 4.7% ahead of the A100 SXM4 40 GB, and 6.1% ahead of the RTX 5000 Ada Generation. The A100 PCIe 80 GB leads it by 5.4%.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: GB20B (N1X 40SM) vs GB202 (RTX 6000D)
• Generation: Blackwell IGP (N1x) vs Blackwell PRO W (x000)
• Transistors: unknown vs 92,200 million
• Die Size: 382 mm² vs 750 mm²
• Transistor Density: not listed vs 122.9M / mm²
• Base Clock: 741 MHz vs 1992 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2346 MHz vs 2430 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1067 MHz 8.5 Gbps effective vs 1560 MHz 25 Gbps effective
• Memory Size: 128 GB vs 84 GB
• Memory Type: LPDDR5X vs GDDR7
• Memory Bus Width: 256 bit vs 448 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 273.2 GB/s vs 1.40 TB/s
• Shading Units: 5120 vs 19968
• TMUs: 320 vs 624
• ROPs: 40 vs 192
• RT Cores: 40 vs 156
• Tensor Cores: 160 vs 624
• Pixel Rate: 93.84 GPixel/s vs 466.6 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 750.7 GTexel/s vs 1,516.3 GTexel/s
• FP32: 24.02 TFLOPS vs 97.04 TFLOPS
• FP16: 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1) vs 97.04 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: unknown vs 600 W
• Slot Width: IGP vs Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: None vs 1x 16-pin
• Suggested PSU: not listed vs 1000 W
• Display Outputs: 1x HDMI vs 4x DisplayPort 2.1b
• DirectX: N/A vs 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• OpenGL: N/A vs 4.6
• Vulkan: N/A vs 1.4
• Dimensions: not listed vs 304 mm length, 137 mm height, 40 mm width
• Release Date: 2026-05-31 vs 2025-07-13
• Predecessor: none vs Workstation Ada
• Launch MSRP: not listed vs 8,565 USD

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 6000D wins on every measurable performance metric. Its FP32 throughput of 97.04 TFLOPS is 4.04 times the N1X 40SM's 24.02 TFLOPS. Its memory bandwidth of 1.40 TB/s is 5.12 times the N1X 40SM's 273.2 GB/s. Its pixel rate of 466.6 GPixel/s is 4.97 times higher, and its texture rate of 1,516.3 GTexel/s is 2.02 times higher. The RTX 6000D also has full API support, four display outputs, and a discrete dual-slot form factor with a dedicated power connector.

The N1X 40SM wins on memory capacity, offering 128 GB versus 84 GB. It also has a smaller die (382 mm² vs 750 mm²), a lower power footprint with no power connectors, and an integrated form factor that requires no external power. The N1X 40SM's release date of May 2026 is later than the RTX 6000D's July 2025 date. The N1X 40SM also has no launch MSRP, while the RTX 6000D launched at 8,565 USD.

For compute workloads that depend on FP32 throughput, tensor operations, or memory bandwidth, the RTX 6000D is the clear choice based on the recorded specifications. The RTX 6000D's 624 tensor cores and 156 RT cores provide substantial acceleration for AI inference and ray tracing workloads, while its 1.40 TB/s bandwidth supports large data movement. The N1X 40SM's 160 tensor cores and 40 RT cores are present but far smaller in scale.

For workloads that need very large memory capacity, the N1X 40SM's 128 GB of LPDDR5X stands out. The RTX 6000D's 84 GB is still large, but the N1X 40SM offers 52.4% more capacity. This could matter for datasets that exceed 84 GB but fit within 128 GB.

The Verdict

The data shows an overwhelming performance advantage for the RTX 6000D. Its 97.04 TFLOPS FP32 output, 1.40 TB/s memory bandwidth, 19968 shading units, and 624 tensor cores place it firmly in the high-end workstation segment, backed by a 98th percentile ranking among all GPUs. The RTX 6000D's average benchmark score of 195964 and its narrow margins against the Tesla V100S, A100 SXM4, and RTX 5000 Ada Generation confirm it is a competitive performer in its class.

The N1X 40SM, with no benchmark scores and a 50th percentile rank, cannot be positioned against the RTX 6000D in any measured workload. Its specifications suggest a fundamentally different product: an integrated GPU with 5120 shading units, 128 GB of LPDDR5X, and no graphics API support. It is not designed for the same tasks as the RTX 6000D, and the database contains no evidence that it can compete on compute performance.

The choice depends on the workload. The RTX 6000D is the only option for users who need DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, or Vulkan 1.4 support, as the N1X 40SM lists all three as N/A. The RTX 6000D also wins on raw throughput, memory bandwidth, and rendering rates by margins ranging from 2.02 times to 5.12 times. The N1X 40SM offers more memory capacity, a smaller die, and an integrated form factor with no power connectors, but it lacks the compute resources and API compatibility required for professional graphics workloads.

Users who require maximum FP32 or FP16 compute, high-bandwidth memory, or full graphics API support should select the RTX 6000D. Users who need more than 84 GB of memory capacity and do not require traditional graphics APIs may find the N1X 40SM's 128 GB configuration relevant, but the lack of benchmark data means its real-world performance remains unverified. The RTX 6000D is the only one of the two with recorded performance evidence, and that evidence supports a high-end positioning.