B200 SXM 192 GB vs Tegra 4

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureVLIW Vec4 (2010−2013)Blackwell (2024)
GPU code nameTegra 4GB100
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date1 August 2013 (11 years ago)2024 (recently)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA coresno data16896
Core clock speed672 MHz1665 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1837 MHz
Number of transistors11 million208,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt1000 Watt
Texture fill rate2.688969.9
Floating-point processing powerno data62.08 TFLOPS
ROPs424
TMUs4528
Tensor Coresno data528

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 5.0 x16
WidthIGPSXM Module

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeSystem SharedHBM3e
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared96 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared4096 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data4.1 TB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXN/AN/A
Shader Modelno dataN/A
OpenGLES 3.0N/A
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA-9.0

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 1000 Watt

Tegra 4 has 4900% lower power consumption.

B200 SXM 192 GB, on the other hand, has a 460% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Tegra 4 and B200 SXM 192 GB. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Tegra 4 is a desktop card while B200 SXM 192 GB is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Tegra 4
Tegra 4
NVIDIA B200 SXM 192 GB
B200 SXM 192 GB

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Tegra 4 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 27 votes

Rate B200 SXM 192 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.