NVIDIA N1X 48SM vs NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for the NVIDIA N1X 48SM versus the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation. Both parts register an average benchmark score of zero and occupy the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database. This absence of measured performance data means the comparison must rely on architectural specifications and calculated throughput values rather than observed frame rates or compute scores.

The N1X 48SM delivers substantially higher raw compute figures on paper. Its FP32 throughput reaches 28.83 TFLOPS, which is 84.6% higher than the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada's 15.62 TFLOPS. The N1X also leads in texture processing at 900.9 GTexel/s versus 244.1 GTexel/s, a 3.69x advantage. Pixel throughput favors the N1X as well at 112.6 GPixel/s against 81.36 GPixel/s, a 38.4% margin.

Memory bandwidth is nearly identical between the two. The N1X 48SM achieves 273.2 GB/s over a 256-bit bus using LPDDR5X memory at 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective). The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada reaches 256.0 GB/s over a 128-bit bus using GDDR6 at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The N1X holds a 6.7% bandwidth advantage despite using a lower effective memory clock, because its bus width is double.

Clock behavior differs sharply. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada runs a higher base clock at 1395 MHz but a lower boost at 1695 MHz. The N1X 48SM starts at 741 MHz base but boosts to 2346 MHz. The N1X boost clock is 38.4% higher than the RTX 3000's boost, which helps explain its larger compute advantage despite the lower base frequency.

Shader resources favor the N1X across the board. It carries 6144 shading units versus 4608, a 33.3% increase. TMU count is 384 versus 144, a 2.67x difference. ROP count is equal at 48. Ray tracing cores number 48 on the N1X versus 36 on the RTX 3000, a 33.3% increase. Tensor cores follow the same pattern: 192 versus 144, again a 33.3% increase.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architectures. The N1X 48SM uses Blackwell 2.0 architecture on the GB20B chip, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation uses Ada Lovelace architecture on the AD106 chip. Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, so the manufacturing node is identical.

Die size and transistor count reveal a major divergence. The GB20B die measures 382 mm², while the AD106 die is 188 mm². That is a 2.03x die area difference. Transistor count for the GB20B is recorded as unknown, but the AD106 packs 22,900 million transistors with a density of 121.8 million transistors per mm². The larger die on the N1X supports its higher resource counts.

Memory technology differs fundamentally. The N1X 48SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit interface, whereas the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit interface. The memory capacity difference is 16x in favor of the N1X. Effective memory speed is 8.5 Gbps for the N1X and 16 Gbps for the RTX 3000, but the wider bus on the N1X compensates for its slower memory clock.

The bus interface also differs. The N1X 48SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display output configurations are distinct: the N1X lists 1x HDMI, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada lists Portable Device Dependent outputs.

API support separates the two more sharply. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1X 48SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. This indicates the N1X is not designed for conventional graphics API workloads, consistent with an integrated graphics processor (IGP) positioned for specialized compute rather than general rendering.

Power characteristics also differ. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada has a recorded TDP of 115 W. The N1X 48SM has an unknown TDP. Both use no power connectors and occupy an IGP slot width.

Release timing shows a three-year gap. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada launched on 2023-03-20, while the N1X 48SM launched on 2026-05-31. The RTX 3000 has a recorded predecessor, Ampere-MW, and successor, Blackwell-MW. The N1X lists no predecessor or successor in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The N1X 48SM wins decisively in compute-heavy scenarios based on raw throughput. Its FP32 figure of 28.83 TFLOPS nearly doubles the RTX 3000's 15.62 TFLOPS. Texture-heavy workloads favor the N1X even more strongly, as its 900.9 GTexel/s is 3.69x the RTX 3000's 244.1 GTexel/s. Pixel throughput favors the N1X by 38.4%. For any workload that scales with shader count, the N1X's 6144 units versus 4608 provides a 33.3% resource advantage.

Memory capacity is a clear N1X win. Its 128 GB of LPDDR5X dwarfs the RTX 3000's 8 GB of GDDR6. Workloads requiring large resident datasets, such as AI model inference or in-memory processing, benefit from this 16x capacity margin. The N1X also holds a slight bandwidth edge at 273.2 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s.

The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada wins in software ecosystem compatibility. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the N1X lists none of these APIs. Applications built on standard graphics APIs will run on the RTX 3000 but may not run on the N1X. The RTX 3000 also has a much higher base clock at 1395 MHz versus 741 MHz, which can benefit workloads that run at sustained lower frequencies rather than boosting.

The RTX 3000's higher effective memory speed of 16 Gbps versus 8.5 Gbps may help latency-sensitive workloads, though the N1X's wider bus mitigates this. The RTX 3000 also has a defined power envelope at 115 W, whereas the N1X's TDP is unknown, making power planning more predictable for the RTX 3000.

Ray tracing and tensor core counts both favor the N1X by 33.3% (48 versus 36 RT cores, 192 versus 144 tensor cores). However, without API support for the N1X, the practical utility of these cores depends on the software stack available. The RTX 3000's mature driver and API support may make its lower core counts more accessible in practice.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM delivers 28.83 TFLOPS FP32, which is 84.6% higher than the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation's 15.62 TFLOPS.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The N1X 48SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada has 8 GB of GDDR6. The N1X has 16 times the memory capacity.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures?

A: The N1X 48SM achieves 273.2 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada achieves 256.0 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. The N1X leads by 6.7%.

Q: Do both GPUs support standard graphics APIs?

A: No. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1X 48SM lists N/A for all three APIs.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The N1X 48SM boosts to 2346 MHz, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada boosts to 1695 MHz. The N1X boost is 38.4% higher.

Q: Which GPU has more shader units and tensor cores?

A: The N1X 48SM has 6144 shading units and 192 tensor cores. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada has 4608 shading units and 144 tensor cores. The N1X leads by 33.3% in both counts.

Q: What is the die size difference?

A: The N1X 48SM uses a 382 mm² die (GB20B chip), while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada uses a 188 mm² die (AD106 chip). The N1X die is 2.03x larger.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA N1X 48SM | NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation |

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

| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Chip | GB20B | AD106 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Die Size | 382 mm² | 188 mm² |

| Transistors | unknown | 22,900 million |

| Base Clock | 741 MHz | 1395 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2346 MHz | 1695 MHz |

| Memory Size | 128 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5X | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Clock | 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 273.2 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 6144 | 4608 |

| TMUs | 384 | 144 |

| ROPs | 48 | 48 |

| RT Cores | 48 | 36 |

| Tensor Cores | 192 | 144 |

| Pixel Rate | 112.6 GPixel/s | 81.36 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 900.9 GTexel/s | 244.1 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 28.83 TFLOPS | 15.62 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 28.83 TFLOPS (1:1) | 15.62 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | unknown | 115 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2026-05-31 | 2023-03-20 |

| Predecessor | None | Ampere-MW |

| Successor | None | Blackwell-MW |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy in raw compute terms. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM offers substantially higher throughput across every measured compute category, with FP32 nearly double, texture rate over 3.6x higher, and pixel rate 38.4% higher than the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada. Its memory capacity of 128 GB is 16x larger, and its bandwidth advantage, while modest at 6.7%, still favors it.

The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation brings a critical advantage in software compatibility. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support make it usable for conventional graphics applications, while the N1X lists no API support. The RTX 3000 also has a much higher base clock and a defined 115 W TDP, which aids power planning.

For compute workloads that do not depend on standard graphics APIs, the N1X 48SM is the stronger part based on the recorded specifications. For applications requiring DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada is the only viable option between the two. The N1X's lack of API support is a decisive limitation for any software built on those interfaces, regardless of its hardware advantages.

The release dates suggest the N1X is a newer design by roughly three years, which aligns with its higher resource counts and newer PCIe 5.0 interface. The RTX 3000 uses PCIe 4.0 and a smaller die. Both are active production parts in the database.

Buyers or integrators should select based on workload requirements. Compute-heavy, API-independent tasks favor the N1X 48SM. Graphics-centric tasks with standard API dependencies require the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada. The benchmark database currently holds no measured performance scores for either part, so these conclusions derive entirely from the specification records.