NVIDIA N1X 40SM vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison: the NVIDIA N1X 40SM has no benchmark entries in the database, while the NVIDIA RTX A400 has nine recorded scores. This asymmetry means the head-to-head analysis relies on the RTX A400's measured results and the N1X 40SM's architectural specifications, rather than direct side-by-side test runs.

The RTX A400 delivers its strongest showing in Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 22844, followed closely by Geekbench Vulkan at 22237. These compute-oriented tests indicate the card handles general-purpose GPU workloads with reasonable competence for its class. The Passmark suite paints a more varied picture: DirectX 9 scores 87, DirectX 10 scores 32, DirectX 11 scores 37, and DirectX 12 scores 27. The DirectX 9 result is notably higher than the newer API scores, suggesting the architecture's strength in legacy rasterization paths.

In 2D and compute tests, the RTX A400 records Passmark G2D of 899 and Passmark GPU Compute of 2557. The overall Passmark G3D score sits at 5983, which places the card at the 35th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 6078. The nearest rivals bracket this figure tightly: the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 matches at 6077 with a 0% delta, the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 sits at 6049 with a 0.5% delta, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 reaches 6117 with a -0.6% delta, and the AMD Radeon 760M lands at 6019 with a 1% delta. Benchmark results indicate the RTX A400 sits squarely in a competitive cluster where no single rival holds a decisive edge.

The N1X 40SM, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores and an average score of zero. Its percentile rank of 50 places it at the median of all GPUs in the database, but this figure derives from its specification profile rather than measured performance. The data shows no wins for either side in the head-to-head section, as the database records zero wins for both items. This absence of direct measurement means any performance comparison must be inferred from the specification differences detailed later in this analysis.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the RTX A400 wins in every measurable benchmark category, simply because it is the only one with test results. Its wins span compute (Geekbench OpenCL 22844), graphics API performance (Passmark DirectX 9 through 12), 2D acceleration (Passmark G2D 899), and general 3D rendering (Passmark G3D 5983). The card also holds a measurable advantage in GPU compute tasks, as shown by the Passmark GPU Compute score of 2557.

The N1X 40SM's wins are entirely speculative, derived from its specification sheet. Its FP32 throughput of 24.02 TFLOPS dwarfs the RTX A400's 2.706 TFLOPS by a factor of roughly nine. Its texture rate of 750.7 GTexel/s compares to 42.29 GTexel/s for the RTX A400, and its pixel rate of 93.84 GPixel/s exceeds 28.19 GPixel/s. Memory bandwidth tells a similar story: 273.2 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s. These figures suggest the N1X 40SM would dominate in compute-heavy and bandwidth-intensive workloads, provided its drivers and software stack can utilize the hardware.

For the RTX A400, the wins concentrate in areas where its software ecosystem and API support provide concrete advantages. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the N1X 40SM lists all APIs as N/A. This means the RTX A400 can run existing Windows and Linux graphics applications today, whereas the N1X 40SM's API support remains undefined in the database. The RTX A400 also wins on physical deployment: it is a single-slot card measuring 163 mm in length and 69 mm in height, with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The N1X 40SM is an IGP with a single HDMI output and no power connectors, which limits its use to systems with an appropriate socket and integrated graphics implementation.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The N1X 40SM lists FP32 performance of 24.02 TFLOPS and matching FP16 of 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1). The RTX A400 lists FP32 of 2.706 TFLOPS and FP16 of 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1). The N1X 40SM's rated throughput is approximately nine times higher.

Q: What benchmark scores does the N1X 40SM have?

A: The database records no benchmark scores for the N1X 40SM. Its average benchmark score is zero, and its percentile rank of 50 is derived from specifications rather than measured tests.

Q: How does the RTX A400 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX A400's average score of 6078 places it nearly even with the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (6077, 0% delta), ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (6049, 0.5% delta) and AMD Radeon 760M (6019, 1% delta), and slightly behind the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 (6117, -0.6% delta).

Q: What are the memory configurations of each GPU?

A: The N1X 40SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A400 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has better API support?

A: The RTX A400 lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1X 40SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan in the database.

Q: What are the physical dimensions and power requirements?

A: The RTX A400 is a single-slot card at 163 mm length and 69 mm height, with no power connectors and a 50 W TDP. The N1X 40SM is an IGP with no slot width specification, no power connectors, and an unknown TDP.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The N1X 40SM uses a GB20B chip built on TSMC's 5 nm process, while the RTX A400 uses a GA107 chip on Samsung's 8 nm process. The N1X 40SM's die size is 382 mm² with an unknown transistor count, whereas the RTX A400's die is 200 mm² with 8,700 million transistors and a density of 43.5M per mm².

Clock speeds diverge substantially. The N1X 40SM runs a 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost. The RTX A400 runs a 1417 MHz base and 1762 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the N1X 40SM uses 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective), and the RTX A400 uses 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

The execution resources show a wide gap. The N1X 40SM has 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores. The RTX A400 has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, 16 ROPs, 6 RT cores, and 24 tensor cores. Memory size and bus width differ completely: 128 GB of LPDDR5X on 256 bit versus 4 GB of GDDR6 on 64 bit.

The N1X 40SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and outputs a single HDMI. The RTX A400 uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and outputs four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connectors. The N1X 40SM lists no TDP; the RTX A400 lists 50 W TDP. The N1X 40SM has no suggested PSU; the RTX A400 suggests 250 W. Release dates also differ: the N1X 40SM is dated 2026-05-31, and the RTX A400 is dated 2024-04-15.

Architecture Differences

The N1X 40SM belongs to the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, specifically the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. The RTX A400 belongs to the Ampere architecture, in the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation. These are distinct architectural generations with different design priorities.

The N1X 40SM uses TSMC's 5 nm process with a 382 mm² die. The RTX A400 uses Samsung's 8 nm process with a 200 mm² die and a stated transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The N1X 40SM's transistor count is unknown, but its larger die and more advanced node suggest a substantially higher count.

The N1X 40SM carries 40 RT cores and 160 tensor cores, indicating a design aimed at ray tracing and AI acceleration. The RTX A400 carries 6 RT cores and 24 tensor cores, a smaller but still present allocation for those workloads. The N1X 40SM's 5120 shading units versus 768 for the RTX A400 reflects a much larger compute footprint.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The N1X 40SM uses LPDDR5X, a low-power memory typically integrated or close to the processor. The RTX A400 uses GDDR6, a dedicated graphics memory. The N1X 40SM's 128 GB capacity and 256-bit bus indicate a design for large working sets, while the RTX A400's 4 GB and 64-bit bus target smaller, more focused workloads.

The N1X 40SM's API support is listed as N/A, which may indicate a proprietary or not-yet-exposed software interface. The RTX A400 supports industry-standard APIs including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1X 40SM is an IGP with no power connectors, while the RTX A400 is a single-slot add-in card with no power connectors but a defined 50 W TDP.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split between specification potential and measured reality. The N1X 40SM offers dramatically higher rated specifications: 24.02 TFLOPS FP32, 273.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, 128 GB of memory, 5120 shading units, and 160 tensor cores. These figures place it at the 50th percentile in the database based on specs alone, and they indicate a GPU designed for large-scale compute and AI tasks.

The RTX A400 delivers actual, recorded performance: an average benchmark score of 6078, a 35th percentile rank, and scores across nine tests that place it in a tight competitive cluster with the GeForce MX230, Quadro P2000, Iris Pro Graphics 6200, and Radeon 760M. Its API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 makes it immediately usable in standard graphics environments.

For users requiring immediate, measured performance in existing applications, the RTX A400 is the only option with verified results. For workloads that can leverage the N1X 40SM's larger memory pool, higher bandwidth, and greater compute throughput, the specification sheet suggests it would outperform the RTX A400 by a wide margin, but no benchmark data confirms this. The database records zero wins for either GPU in direct comparison, leaving the verdict dependent on whether one prioritizes measured results or rated specifications.